The wife of one of the murder victims later stuck up for Gibbs:

Mr. Gibbs, tanned and healthy, said that Mr. Eppolito had taken his "constitutional rights and put them in the street."

He found a strange bedfellow in Anna Lino, wife of Edward Lino, whom Mr. Eppolito and Mr. Caracappa were found to have murdered 16 years ago.

"Nineteen years," she said. "Don't you think he has a right to have an outburst?"

Yes, I do. As to whether Bruce Cutler or Eddie Hayes will be found to have been ineffective in their defense, I'm skeptical. It's usually the first motion filed when a new lawyer enters the case after a jury verdict and before sentencing. The cops won't get a chance to raise it again until they lose their direct appeal and reach the habeas stage. I've just read the motion, Mr. Eppolito's affidavit and the government's response. Here's what the Government has to say:

Notably, both Messrs. Cutler and Hayes are extraordinarily experienced counsel with impeccable abilities at trial. They each engaged in vigorous cross-examinations of the government's witnesses, and any decisions about how to proceed at trial were clearly tactical choices. It is not for this Court to second guess those decisions.

One of the arguments is that Hayes and Cutler did not call a witness, Anthony Casso, who would have provided favorable evidence to the defendants. Indeed, Mr. Casso has written a letter to the judge confirming the defense ignored him despite his offers. But, according to the Government response, here's why:

As for Casso, as the Court noted both during trial and on May 3, calling him to testify would have been a catastrophic choice by the defendants. Casso, who is currently serving a life sentence at the highest security federal penitentiary in the United States, could only benefit himself by helping the government. Indeed, Casso had previously implicated the defendants in murder during proffer sessions with the government and even did so on national television. Moreover, in addition to the letters provided to the defendants, Casso wrote other letters to the government offering his assistance in its efforts to prosecute the defendants. If he was called to testify, the defendants would have no assurance that he would not implicate them to curry favor with the government. Moreover, Casso's credibility would have been decimated on cross-examination as the government inquired into his past unsubstantiated and scurrilous allegations.

As to the cops' claims that their lawyers prevented them from taking the stand, the Government writes:

....had Eppolito testified, the government certainly would have been given the opportunity to cross-examine him on issues that the Court had previously excluded in its March 20, 2006 in limine order, see Fed. R. Evid. 608(b), including evidence that Eppolito had extorted Salvatore "Sammy the Bull" Gravano, had passed information to Rosario Gambino, and had used his authority as a police detective to frame innocent men for murder. This evidence not only would have undercut Eppolito's credibility, as it evidenced a pattern of deceit while wearing a NYPD detective badge, but also would have further bolstered the government's contention that he had committed crimes for the mafia for money.

Similarly, had Caracappa testified, the government would have introduced evidence about his fraudulent NYPD application, in which he lied about having never been convicted of any crimes, his alleged sexual assault of a defendant's wife, and his patent violation of NYPD policy by using cocaine while acting as an undercover narcotics officer. This evidence would have solidified the government's claim that he too was dishonest and was not beholden to the law.

While the government's obvious and primary purpose in praising the defense lawyers is to protect the jury verdict, the defendants will have a very tough road to hoe to make the required legal showing. But, don't count out Joe Bondy, he's in for the fight and he'll give it his best.