‘CHEF’ TRIAL RACES TO JURY
Defense calls no witnesses, closing arguments tomorrow
The star-studded “Top Chef” trial abruptly ended yesterday when the government rested its case as lawyers for four Teamsters charged with trying to extort the reality TV show for jobs declined to call any witnesses for the defense.
U.S. District Court Judge Douglas P. Woodlock scheduled closing arguments for tomorrow morning and released the jury until then.
It was unclear why attorneys for John Fidler, Daniel Redmond, Robert Cafarelli and Michael Ross suddenly decided to sit out presenting a case. They and their clients are forbidden from speaking to reporters by Woodlock.
The judge will meet with the trial teams today to hash out how he will instruct the panel on federal Hobbs Act extortion and conspiracy laws.
The final verdict could hinge on his instructions.
Prosecutors focused much of their six days of witness testimony on the vulgar language, physical intimidation and racist and homophobic slurs the Local 25 members are accused of hurling at the Bravo production’s cast and crew during the Teamsters’ protest of the nonunion production at a restaurant in Milton in 2014.
Woodlock, however, told the legal teams yesterday he will instruct jurors they “are not here to decide whether profane language was used or people were unpleasant in their appearance,” or whether a union member is more qualified to perform a task than a non-union worker.
Rather, the veteran jurist said, the jury must find that the “Top Chef” crew, including longtime host Padma Lakshmi, “were faced with threats” meant to frighten the show into giving the Teamsters paying truck-driving jobs that were already filled by nonunion production assistants.
Addressing the attorneys after the jurors had left, Woodlock said “there is evidence” the jury could use to find that was the case.
Multiple prosecution witnesses complained that Milton police working details at the location shoot did nothing to stop the harassment. But if that leaves jurors questioning whether the confrontation wasn’t all that bad, Woodlock said, “The fact that some local violation was not pursued is not here for their consideration.”
The defense teams, meanwhile, filed motions yesterday for all four men asking Woodlock to enter judgments of acquittal. They cite what they argue is a lack of evidence to convict their clients. They also allude to a 1973 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court (United States v. Enmons) that held the Hobbs Act does not apply to violence by unions “to achieve legitimate union objectives.”
Threats and the use of force are punishable if union workers have no legitimate claim to their end goal.
Prosecution witnesses testified they saw no evidence, such as signs, that Teamsters were conducting an official picket. And, they said, there was not a collective-bargaining agreement in place that entitled Teamsters to jobs.
Fidler, 52, Redmond, 48, Ross, 62, and Cafarelli, 46, could face up to 20 years in federal prison if convicted.
A fifth Teamster, Local 25’s former secretary-treasurer Mark Harrington, pleaded guilty to attempted extortion in December and was sentenced by Woodlock to six months’ home confinement. But the jury will not be influenced by that because Woodlock would not permit them to learn what became of Harrington’s case.
Woodlock debated at the time whether the punishment was enough to deter future union thuggery. But, he ultimately told Harrington, “You have to pay a price for having been involved in this, and it seems to me it’s a fair price.”