Mike Duffy's testifying in his own defence not without risk

Duffy expected to take the witness box this week, make first public statements on trial.

Sen. Mike Duffy, who has pleaded not guilty to 31 charges of fraud, breach of trust and bribery, is expected to testify this week at his trial in an Ottawa courtroom.

When, as expected, Mike Duffy takes the witness box in Ottawa courtroom 33 this week, the senator will tackle what he has been itching to do since his trial began offer, in his own voice, his defence against the 31 charges of fraud, bribery and breach of trust he now faces.


It's a legal strategy that comes with both advantages and pitfalls, but at the same time it would almost certainly be the most compelling chapter of the defence narrative put forth by Duffy's lawyer Donald Bayne since the trial began in early April.

"The whole point of cross-examination is to build the defence case in a coherent way, you are telling a story. And usually that crescendos with your client completing the story," says Jason Neuberger, a Toronto-based criminal lawyer who has been following the trial.

One of Bayne's goals, Neuberger says, is to re-establish the senator's credibility. "It's' very hard now to complete that picture without him testifying. "The Duffy trial resumes Monday at 9 a.m. ET, when the Crown is expected to call its final witness, Senator George Furey. Furey was appointed Speaker of the Senate last week, but in 2013 was the Liberal representative on the committee that changed an audit report on Duffy's expenses.

As for the garrulous Duffy, this week will be his first chance to speak at length publicly since before the trial began. He has stayed largely silent, ignoring the throngs of reporters as he would enter and exit the Ottawa courthouse. However, Bayne has repeatedly said that his client would testify on his own behalf.

If that happens, this will be his opportunity to justify, legally, his series of controversial expense claims expenses the Crown contends were not related to Senate or government business and should not have been billed to the taxpayer.

He may also see this as his moment to try to rehabilitate his political and public reputation.
How long Duffy would be in the witness box is hard to say. Some of the Crown witnesses spent days facing a barrage of meticulous cross-examination by Bayne.

Bayne is likely to be just as thorough with his client, delving through all the allegations, while allowing Duffy to comment and provide explanations. Chief among them will be the fact that Duffy, a senator representing P.E.I., had designated his home in that province (a renovated cottage) as his primary residence, which he felt allowed him to claim, under Senate rules, housing expenses for his house in Ottawa.

But the Crown has argued that his primary residence was, in fact, in Ottawa, where he owned a home and had lived most of his adult life, meaning he was ineligible for these claims.