We all know what the golden rule is during trial: a party cannot ask the jury to place themselves in the situation of the defendant or victim- and then ask the jury how they would feel if so situated. (Lost in all the hoopla over self defense/stand your ground is the fact that not only is the golden rule not applicable to the defense, the defense must ask the jury to place themselves in the defendant's shoes, as the jury instructions require the jury to make such a finding as to the defendant's actions.)
We all know that Mr. Black recently lost a very difficult case in state court in West Palm Beach despite presenting an excellent defense. Mr. Black blogged about his opening statement here, and we reprint a portion of his post below. It is without a doubt a powerful, moving opening that one would expect from a master. However, the court apparently sustained objections about the opening statement.
Our simple question is this: isn't much of the power of the opening created through a "golden rule" violation? Should Mr. Black have been surprised that the prosecution would not sit by quietly while he masterfully placed the jury in the car in the driver's seat with his client?