The Brooklyn Ink

Unusual Trial Concludes in Brooklyn Supreme Court

“The defendant does not have the burden of proof, it’s the burden of the people to prove that a crime was committed and that I was the one who did it.” So began the defense’s closing arguments in an unusual trial that concluded Monday in Brooklyn Supreme Court. The central figure in the trial, Ned Morrow, was in a dual role: defendant, charged with robbing a McDonald’s in Park Slope and defense attorney representing himself. Presiding Judge Joel Goldberg, in an interview, said self-representation in such a criminal case is “very, very rare” and said it was the first time he was handling such a case in 23 years on the bench. “Usually I manage to talk them out of it,” he said, noting that in most cases “attorneys don’t even represent themselves”. Before allowing self-representation to proceed, Goldberg explained that the court had to ensure that the defendant understood the risks of such a choice. Defendant Morrow was exercising his sixth Amendment right to represent himself, called a “pro se” defense in legal parlance. While he sometimes struggled to reconcile his duties as his own attorney with his personal interest in winning an acquittal, Morrow displayed a good grounding in courtroom conventions that ensured that his performance was far from amateur hour. As for the outcome? Read on.