THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER
PHILADELPHIA, MONDAY, AUGUST 17, 1992
MARK A. TARASIEWICZ
Jurors have called the 6 ½ hour closing argument in the trial of deposed Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega "pivotal" to their understanding of the case.
The presentation, delivered by Myles H. Malman, required three months worth of preparation, during which the former federal prosecutor summarized 17,000 pages of testimony. As a precaution, he memorized the first 10 sentences of his 300-page oration, then practiced them aloud in an empty courtroom.
High Point Of Career
Noriega was convicted in April on eight of 10 drug and racketeering charges. Without a doubt, Malman —who recently joined Kohn Nast & Graf — regards the experience as the high point of his legal career.
"It was very intense," Malman said in an interview last week. "The trial had lasted seven months, and there were little facts that we had brought out along the way that were critical linchpins to the proving of the charges. The jury had to be reminded of them."
A native of New York City, Malman, 45, served for 10 years on the staff of Manhattan District Attorney Robert M. Morgenthau as senior trial counsel. After spending the next four years at the U.S. Attorney's Office in Florida, Malman entered into private practice in Miami in 1988 — the year Noriega was indicted in Tampa for marijuana smuggling.
The following year, Malman accepted an offer from then-U.S. Attorney Dexter Lehtinen to return to the U.S. Attorney's Office as the deputy first assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida.
"Nothing much was being done because Noriega was in Panama." Malman said.
"There were several big cases lying around the office and Dexter said to me ,'If you want to participate in one of these cases, just pick one up.' There were two lying around. One was the Medellin cartel case ... and the other one was the Noriega case. For some reason, I had this hunch that (we had a) chance to get (Noriega) back."
Not long after the coup attempt in Panama in October 1989, Malman spearheaded his district's presentation in a bid to determine which district would try Noriega if he were brought to the United States. The Southern District of Florida was ultimately chosen.
Three-Man Team
Noriega surrendered to the United States soon after the U.S. invasion of Panama and Malman was appointed deputy chief of the 20-attorney team in charge of prosecuting the case. From that team, only three individuals made in-court presentations — Malman and U.S. attorneys Michael Sullivan and Guy Lewis.
Six days after Noriega's surrender to U.S. authorities in Panama. Malman became the first member of the prosecuting team to travel to Panama to interview witnesses. All told, the team made 12 trips to Panama and interviewed 80 witnesses in the case.
"The people in the beginning were all afraid to come up." Malman said. "They were afraid of Noriega. They all thought he was going to be acquitted, and that he would come back to Panama and there would be terrible repercussions against them."
Convincing key witnesses to testify proved difficult and required "long hours of patient, hard work," Malman said. Despite the team's efforts, there were many "two-steppers" — as they came to be nicknamed by the prosecutors — who refused to testify, and who volunteered only certain details.
Nevertheless, the prosecuting team was successful at building a strong case against Noriega. Malman examined several critical witnesses, including former Noriega aide Lt. Col. Luis Del Cid, pilot David Rodriguez Ortiz, former Panamanian ambassador Ricardo Bilonick and cartel transportation boss Pepe Cabrera.
Minimal U.S. Contact
Noriega's chief defense was that he worked closely with the U.S. government and provided information on alleged drug traffickers to the Drug Enforcement Administration. Malman in turn argued that the Panamanian leader's cooperation with the government was minimal, at best.
Still, the prosecuting team harbored concern that information that surfaced during the 1991 trial of several of Noriega's co-defendants would jeopardize their case.
"That was really a big set-back for us," Malman said. "We were going to have to showcase some of our evidence to the defense. There's an old saying that cases, unlike wine or cheese, don't get better with age. But it worked out very well."
According to Malman, Noriega never testified during his trial, but gave a 3 1/2 -hour diatribe at the sentencing proceedings, during which "he started going through the whole history of Panama." The court gave him a 40-year sentence.
Appeal Lodged
Noriega is expected to argue on appeal that American courts do not have jurisdiction over him because of his alleged "prisoner of war" status, which mandates that he be tried only by a military or world court.
Malman, who has chosen to turn his attention back to private practice, is skeptical that Noriega's appeal will go very far, especially in light of recent Supreme Court decisions in similar cases.
At Kohn Nast & Graf, Malman is currently working on a case involving the alleged PCB contamination of individuals living near Paoli's rail yards, and will consult with Robert A. Swift, an attorney at the firm who is preparing for trial in Hawaii against Imelda Marcos and the Marcos estate on behalf of 10,000 torture victims.
Mid-Trial Offer of Probation for Client
