I can't believe a prosecutor mentioned the Chewbacca Defense in closing and got away with it. From United States v. Moise, the court quotes the prosecutors closing:
And I don’t want to seem flip, but some of you may have seen it. I think it’s a South Park episode. And there’s a character on there who is -- plays kind of a shyster attorney. And there’s a scene where he’s giving his closing, and he puts up a picture of a Wookie from Star Wars. And he said: That’s a Wookie. What does that have to do with this case? Nothing. That doesn’t make any sense. This case doesn’t make any sense.
Defense counsel objected and, at sidebar, argued that the prosecutor had implied he was a “shyster lawyer,” which the pros-ecutor disputed. The district court instructed the jury to disregard “those last couple of statements about the South Park episode,” and defense counsel did not request further relief. The prosecutor then continued with his argument that defense counsel was trying to distract the jury with irrelevant matters. The court also reminded the jury three times throughout the proceedings that statements made by attorneys are not evidence. Ultimately, the jury reached a guilty verdict on seventeen counts, but was unable to reach a verdict on the remaining six.
The parties agree to that the prosecutor’s “shyster” remark could have been perceived as an attack on the credibility or integ-rity of Moise’s counsel. We also agree that the remark was im-proper on that basis. See Young, 570 U.S. at 9 (attorneys “must not be permitted to make unfounded and inflammatory attacks on the opposing advocate”); United States v. McLain, 823 F.2d 1457, 1462 (11th Cir. 1987) (“[t]o discredit defense counsel in front of the jury is improper”), overruled on other grounds as stated in United States v. Watson, 866 F.2d 381, 385 n.3 (11th Cir. 1989). Nevertheless, we see nothing in the record to suggest that Moise was prejudiced by the “shyster” comment. It was a single, isolated remark in an eight-day trial, and we cannot say it perme-ated the entire trial. See Weinstein, 762 F.2d at 1542. It also came in rebuttal during otherwise proper argument that defense coun-sel’s contentions about the IRS’s initial calculations were not di-rectly relevant to Moise’s guilt or innocence. So despite the pejo-rative nature of the word “shyster,” the jury would have under-stood the prosecutor’s remark as a narrow response concerning the initial calculations, not as a general attack on defense counsel’s character.Here's the scene from South Park, a classic:
