Martha Stewart's trial resumes today and prosecutors are days away from resitng. Should Martha testify in her own defense?

Our view: Too risky, don't do it. Argue reasonable doubt and harp in closing on testimony elicited by others that's favorable to Martha.

First, star witness Douglas Faneuil, the Merrill Lynch & Co. assistant who handled Stewart's sale, did not waver in his assertion that Bacanovic ordered him to tip Stewart that ImClone founder Sam Waksal was dumping his shares.

And second, Stewart's personal assistant, Ann Armstrong, testified that Stewart, just before meeting with federal investigators, altered a computer log of a message left by Bacanovic on Dec. 27, 2001, the day she sold. Stewart then immediately told her to change it back, Armstrong testified.

The Judge dealt a serious blow to the prosecution last week by precluding them from calling an expert to prove that she committed securities fraud.

Gerald Shargel, noted New York criminal defense lawyer and white-collar crime expert whom we respect enormously, also says Martha doesn't need to take the stand.

While the ultimate decision as to whether to testify is up to the client, Martha has made it clear she will follow her lawyers' advice. Barring unforseen developments this week, we suspect they will advise her not to take the stand.

The Prosecution case ran into some potholes --as Shargel points out:

But the primary charge here is obstructing justice. To that end, the chief prosecutor claimed in her opening statement that the case is about deceit, that when interviewed by government officials in a voluntary but ill-advised office visit, Stewart lied repeatedly.

In the Friday court session, however, the jury learned that the sole records of that meeting are notes and reports by FBI agent Catherine Farmer. Yet, by her own admission, Farmer was fresh to the case and knew very little about it while taking the notes.

Under effective cross-examination by Stewart lawyer John Tigue, Farmer also admitted her notes were incomplete and contained fragmentary answers.
Worse, her later typed reports included answers omitted from the notes and reconstructed from memory. That Special Agent Farmer was the only federal agent taking notes that day is not surprising. This is a routine ploy to avoid inconsistencies among note-takers.

But now the government is stuck with inconsistencies of a different kind, inconsistencies between Farmer's own notes and her later typewritten reports.
Without a sworn statement, stenographic minutes or taped accounts of what Stewart actually told the prosecutors, the government's case suddenly seems vulnerable.

Our advice to Martha: You've got a great lawyer. The Judge dealt the prosecution a setbackThe Judge said no to allowing the government's expert to testify. That's a big boon for you. Don't risk it. Follow your lawyer's advice and let him bring the case home.