by TChris

TalkLeft advised Martha Stewart last week not to testify. Others agree that the risks of taking the stand to tell her story outweigh the benefits, given the weakness of the prosecution's case.

The media-savvy Stewart may also think her public expects her to take the stand. Heeding that urge, however, would expose her to prosecutors' questions and the possibility of a public meltdown. And that could be fatal to her case, lawyers said.

"Cross examination is not appearing in front of a board of directors or on an analysts call. . . . The questions are going to be tough. If there's even a flash of arrogance or anger, it will be devastating to her," said Alan Lieberman, a former federal prosecutor.

But only Martha Stewart can choose, and she will have to wait before she can make a fully informed decision.

Stewart's lawyers will also almost certainly urge her to wait to make her decision until Monday when U.S. District Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum says she will decide whether to dismiss the most serious charge in the case -- a securities fraud count that carries up to 10 years in prison.

As Roger and TalkLeft observed in comments to an earlier post, a dismissal of the securities fraud charge would send a message to the jury that the prosecution made a serious mistake bringing this case, leaving little reason for Stewart to accept the risk of testifying.