Rod Blagojevich has loaded his witness list with star power, but no one’s performance will matter as much — or be as highly expected — as his own.

The beleaguered ex-governor is expected to take the stand at his corruption trial early this week, following testimony from his sister-in-law and his estranged brother, Robert, who is also charged with what prosecutors have described as a “political crime spree.”

Though Blagojevich is not required to testify in his own defense, legal experts contend that his team had little choice after their often repeated and very public promises for him to do so. His testimony also has been spurred by U.S. District Judge James Zagel, who suggested that the defense strategy based on Blagojevich’s good intentions all but requires him to take the stand and explain his state of mind.

But putting Blagojevich on the stand comes with considerable risk. The loquacious ex-governor is notorious for his rambling responses to tough questions, a penchant for quoting Rudyard Kipling in stressful times and a habit of comparing himself to historic figures such as Mahatma Gandhi.

“I should think that the defense will be losing a lot of sleep over this,” said Leonard Cavise, a DePaul University law professor who has been attending the trial. “He can’t keep his mouth shut, so you worry that he’s going to open himself up to things he shouldn’t.”

The defense, which presents its side starting Monday, will attempt to show that Blagojevich had no intention of committing any crimes when he led animated discussions about bolstering his campaign coffers in the weeks before his December 2008 arrest. His attorneys also will try to demonstrate that the ex-governor merely engaged in political horse-trading and that none of his aides — many of whom are lawyers — told him that his plan could be illegal when he plotted to swap Barack Obama’s U.S. Senate seat for a high-paying job or Cabinet post.

The judge told Blagojevich’s lawyers that they may need to call him first because he essentially is a foundation witness in his own case, and follow-up witnesses would corroborate his testimony. It’s possible that he could return a second time to the stand for a dramatic conclusion to the defense’s case.

Since the trial’s opening statements, predicting Blagojevich’s courtroom performance has been a popular parlor game among legal experts and journalists following the case. The prophecies are mixed, with some thinking he can’t control himself and others quick to point out that he’s a former prosecutor who twice won statewide office.

“The lawyer in him is going to try to outfox the other lawyers, and the politician in him will want to campaign for the jury’s vote,” criminal-defense attorney Steven Greenberg said. “That’s a very dangerous combination.”

Though Blagojevich has spent the 19 months since his arrest proclaiming his innocence, he largely has avoided specific questions about his actions and the contents of various wiretaps. Instead, he has insisted that his sole motivation as governor was his love for the people of Illinois and a desire to promote his populist agenda.

Blagojevich’s natural reflex has always been to play to the crowd. He’ll say or do almost anything to curry favor, even if it means playing the fool on reality TV or praying with strangers outside the courthouse.

Though his lawyers spent much of last week preparing him for his testimony, legal experts said the ex-governor’s impulsiveness must weigh heavily on his attorneys — especially as he’ll be asked to explain things such as his questionable work ethic, his wife’s maligned real estate business and jaw-dropping spending habits that include $400,000 for clothes over a nearly seven-year period.

It would be a difficult task for any defendant, but it becomes even more arduous when it involves one who loves to talk and has been under federal investigation since 2004.

“It’s dangerous,” said Richard Kling, a professor at Chicago-Kent College of Law. “The government has six years of information that they’re ready to use. He’s opening himself to anything in their arsenal.”

The defense also has promised that Patti Blagojevich will testify on her husband’s behalf, though some legal experts question the wisdom of putting her on the stand. In wiretaps played for the jury, the former first lady does nothing to dispel her reputation as a foul-mouthed Lady Macbeth.

Never charged with a crime, Patti Blagojevich won some public affection last year after appearing on a reality TV show in which she lived in a jungle with D-list celebrities and ate a tarantula. Local criminal-defense attorneys said she should avoid testifying and instead ride any lingering good will and avoid facing questions about her real estate deals and involvement in her husband’s activities.

“She’s radioactive,” Greenberg said. “She wouldn’t survive a cross-examination from the prosecution.”

In addition to Blagojevich and his wife, the defense has promised to call about a dozen witnesses, including a few “prominent public officials.” That group is expected to include White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and Valerie Jarrett, another top Obama aide.

Also under subpoena is retired Illinois Senate President Emil Jones Jr., who, along with Jarrett, was considered a possible replacement to Obama’s vacant U.S. Senate seat.

Experts said the high-profile witnesses won’t hurt Blagojevich’s case, but they probably won’t help it much either. All are expected to testify that they were unaware of any criminal activity on Blagojevich’s end.

“I don’t think they’re going to matter at all,” Cavise said. “These guys are going to have precious little to say.”

In the end, the case may come down to Blagojevich’s ability to save himself by using the same charisma and political savvy that helped him win multiple gubernatorial and congressional elections.

“Put him on the stand and let him do his thing,” said former prosecutor Ronald C. Smith, who’s now a professor at the John Marshall Law School. “Either he’ll charm them or he won’t. What’s he got to lose at this point?”

(Source: Chicago Tribune)