Should a Defendant Take the Stand?

Does a defendant have to testify to win at trial?

While most know there's no legal requirement, the real issue is much more nuanced and depends on the facts of each case. I talk about not only the risks and strategies involved, but also recent Supreme Court precedent.

Key takeaways:

• There’s No One-Size-Fits-All Answer: Whether a defendant should testify depends on factors like prior convictions (which may become evidence if they testify), case circumstances, and the centrality of the defendant’s perspective—e.g., in self-defense cases, only the defendant can explain their own mindset 01:54.
• Testifying Is About Credibility, Not Advocacy: A key theme that emerged was the importance of acting as a truthful witness, not an advocate. Over-advocacy can make a defendant appear defensive and less believable to a jury 06:18.
• Preparation and Recent Legal Developments Matter: Several points were raised, including the implications of the Supreme Court’s decision in Villarreal v. Texas. Defendants may be barred from consulting with their lawyer about testimony during a trial break, making pre-testimony preparation with counsel more critical than ever 15:19.

The nuances of testifying—or choosing not to—require careful consideration, preparation, and a strong lawyer-client relationship.

FAQ's

Do defendants have to testify to win their criminal case?

No, defendants do not have to testify to win their case; it depends on various facts and circumstances. The conversation focused on how each situation is unique, and sometimes defendants are better off not taking the stand, while in other cases, their testimony may help clarify important issues like self-defense.

How do lawyers prepare defendants who need to testify in court?

Lawyers use various techniques, including dialogue practice and even hiring professionals, to help clients feel more comfortable testifying. The discussion explored strategies like building trust, focusing on clear factual storytelling rather than advocacy, and preparing clients to answer questions directly without slipping into self-defense or argument.

Why is it risky for a defendant to advocate for themselves while testifying?

A key theme that emerged was that when defendants advocate for themselves, it can make them seem less believable and overly defensive. Several points were raised, including how jurors may interpret this defensiveness as a sign of untrustworthiness and how it can undermine trust in the lawyer's advocacy.

Got a question you want answered on the podcast? Call 614-859-2119 and leave us a voicemail. Steve will answer your question on the next podcast!

Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.

Recorded at Channel 511.

Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.

Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.

He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.

Steve has unique experience handling numerous high-publicity cases that have garnered national attention.

For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense.

Copyright 2026 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law

Mentioned in this episode:

Circle 270 Media Podcast Consultants

Circle 270 Media® is a podcast consulting firm based in Columbus, Ohio, specializing in helping businesses develop, launch, and optimize podcasts as part of their marketing strategy. The firm emphasizes the importance of storytelling through podcasting to differentiate businesses and engage with their audiences effectively. www.circle270media.com