What the Opening Statement in ASAP Rocky’s Trial Teach About Combatting False Accusations: A Minnesota Criminal Defense Attorney Explains

February 1, 2025
Subzero Criminal Defense

(photo credit by CC 2.0)

The trial of ASAP Rocky has garnered lots of media attention worldwide. For those who don’t know, ASAP Rocky is a famous rapper. And he is dating the even more famous Rihanna, the 2nd wealthiest female musician in the world. Part of the news coverage surrounding the trial is Rihanna’s attendance at the trial. But this post will focus on the tactics and strategy in the trial itself, specifically the Defense’s opening statement. ASAP Rocky is charged with two counts of assault over an altercation that occurred in Hollywood in 2021. Opening statements were delivered on January 24th, 2025.

Contrasting this case from the more typical conservative opening statement

Before launching into talking about why the Defense’s opening was executed so magnificently, it’s important to distinguish it from what a lot of lawyers do. Most law schools teach lawyers to be conservative in opening statements. “Don’t promise anything” is what is taught and as a result, the majority of defense lawyers follow this. This philosophy comes from a perspective that the burden of proof is on the State and that you can hide behind that burden like a tortoise. The problem is that the tortoise strategy cuts against you from an advocacy perspective. If the State makes a bunch of claims and then the Defense gets up doesn’t assert anything at all, who is the jury likely to believe? It comes off as weakness, and like you don’t have a case at all.

Using the opening statement to fight fire with fire

There is a better way to do opening statements. Fighting fire with fire, and taking on the burden of proving things comes from Herbert Stern’s five-volume magnum opus, Trying Cases to Win. It’s important to note that you don’t lose the presumption of innocence by using openings to demonstrate your confidence in your case. But from an advocacy perspective you reap huge rewards in applying your counter narrative to the prosecution’s immediately after their opening statement. This tactic was most famously executed by Tom Mesereau in the 2005 Michael Jackson trial where he said he said “I will prove” so many times in the opening that the prosecutor objected. And he was criticized by many for not taking the tortoise approach that lawyers are taught in law school. But Mesereau was an incredibly skilled criminal defense attorney who knew from an advocacy perspective it was much better to confront the State’s case right from the get go. No hiding behind burdens or playing it safe. Most of the time, jury’s have already made up their mind by the end of the case. You need to convince them at the beginning.

The Defense’s opening was a powerful rejoinder to the State’s case

It was clear from the very first words out of Joe Tacopina’s mouth that he was not taking a conservative approach but was going to go after the complaining witness. He started, “This case is about one man’s lie, jealousy, and greed.” The Defense’s theory is that the complaining witness, Terell Ephron, fabricated the assault charges against ASAP Rocky. And Mr. Tacopina spent a majority of the opening statement going after the complaining witness.  He highlighted the complaining witness’s animosity towards ASAP Rocky, his admission of motivation to get money out of him, and his record of lying. Mr. Tacopina promised the jury evidence of the complaining witness’s lies, jealousy, and greed. And he did anything but the typical tortoise opening statement. The Defense’s intense focus on the motivations of the complaining witness led the prosecutor to object many times. Which, contrary to what some people think, demonstrated how effective the opening statement was. You will notice how many times the judge overruled the objections. Similarly, in 2024, I was doing an opening statement in a multiple count felony jury trial where I was also shining a giant spotlight on the complaining witness’s intense animosity and history of lying in the opening statement. The prosecutor strenuously objected, but the judge overruled the objections. Those not in the know, may think being objected to in opening statement is bad. But an objection may be more showing that the prosecutor has been hurt and wants to try and stop the bleeding. Which is exactly what occurred in my case and what was happing in the ASAP Rocky trial. A powerful opening is tactic that does more good than a conservative one. The Defense’s opening statement was a powerful rejoinder, that let the jury know that the Defense was not sitting back on its heels, but was going to be fighting fire with fire.

Conclusion

If you are charged with a crime in Minnesota, you don’t want any old lawyer, you want a criminal defense lawyer who regularly goes to trial. There is a big difference between a lawyer that pleads every case out and one who is willing to fight in the cases where it matters. In 2024, I tried two felony jury trials to verdict. I’m ready to fight for your rights. Contact Subzero Criminal Defense for a free consultation. 651-248-5142