Michael Miske’s defense attorneys rested their case Tuesday after nearly three weeks of presenting evidence aimed at distancing the alleged racketeering boss from the crimes he’s accused of. 

Much of their questioning centered around alternate explanations for the disappearance of Johnathan Fraser, whom prosecutors say Miske conspired to have kidnapped and killed in 2016. 

Through a series of law enforcement experts and evidence analysts, Miske’s defense tried to highlight a lack of forensic evidence tying Miske to Fraser’s last-known location as well as leads investigators followed after his disappearance, including a purported sighting of Fraser after he was last seen by loved ones. Fraser’s body has never been found. 

Miske is charged with 16 counts, the most serious of which include murder in aid of racketeering and murder-for-hire conspiracy resulting in death in connection with Fraser’s killing. Both carry mandatory minimum life sentences if he’s convicted. He has pleaded not guilty to all counts.

Opposing Theories

Prosecutors say Miske arranged to have associates kidnap 21-year-old Fraser from the Hawaii Kai apartment where he was living with his girlfriend and Miske’s daughter-in-law, Delia Fabro-Miske, and ordered him killed and his body disposed of at sea. Multiple government witnesses testified that Miske held a grudge against Fraser because he blamed him for causing a car crash that injured both Fraser and Miske’s son, Caleb. Caleb died of his injuries four months later. 

Witnesses said despite evidence showing it was actually Caleb who was behind the wheel the day of the wreck, Miske was bent on convincing people that Fraser had been driving and got angry with anyone who said otherwise. 

Miske’s defense tried to counter this theory with one of its witnesses, Jill Slade, who was working as nurse manager at The Queen’s Medical Center on the floor where Caleb and Fraser were hospitalized after their crash in November 2015. 

Defense attorney Michael Kennedy asked Slade if she recalled any animosity between Miske’s family and Fraser’s family while the two young men were in the hospital. 

“There was nothing unusual that occurred,” Slade testified. 

Kennedy also called Josiah Roloff, a digital forensics expert who analyzed Miske’s movements on the day of Fraser’s disappearance — July 30, 2016 — using cellphone location data. 

Kennedy pulled up a map of Oahu showing the cell towers Miske’s phone connected to over the course of that day. 

The phone did not connect to any cell towers from around 4:15 a.m. to 1:06 p.m., possibly because it was off, Kennedy said. Then at 1:06 p.m., it pinged off of a tower just east of Honolulu and later that afternoon in the downtown area, indicating the phone was moving west across the island, he said. 

At around 8:50 p.m., it pinged off a tower near H-1, showing movement toward Kaneohe, and later, between 10:50 p.m. and 11:23 p.m., it connected to a cell tower in the Kailua area. 

But the phone, “never connects with a tower in the Hawaii Kai area that entire day, correct?” Kennedy asked. 

“Correct,” Roloff said. 

On cross examination, prosecutors pointed out that the cellphone carrier, AT&T, doesn’t verify the timestamps of cell tower pings for data transactions that aren’t billed to the customer. They also said the FBI considers non-billable AT&T data transactions unreliable for the purpose of plotting cell site connections. 

Besides trying to place Miske away from Fraser’s Hawaii Kai apartment around the time he went missing, defense attorneys also attempted to raise doubts among jurors about the prosecutor’s timeline of his disappearance. 

Fraser’s girlfriend at the time, Ashley Wong, who testified for the government, said she went to a spa day with Miske’s daughter-in-law, who is also his former co-defendant, on the morning of July 30, 2016. She testified Fraser wasn’t responding to her texts and calls all day starting at 9 a.m., which was unusual for him.

But a witness for the defense, FBI Agent Scott Bakken, testified he interviewed a former classmate of Fraser’s who said he saw Fraser at the Windward City Shopping Center between 5:30 and 6 p.m. on July 30, 2016, sitting on a curb between a Baskin-Robbins and an L&L Hawaiian Barbecue.  

“He seemed to be fine,” the classmate, Adrian Tam, wrote in a statement dated Aug. 1, 2016, that was shown to the jury. 

On cross examination, prosecutors asked Bakken if he was aware that there has been no confirmed sighting of Fraser since July 30, 2016. 

“I’m aware of it, yes,” Bakken said. 

Prosecutors also noted Tam did not seem sure in his written statement and wrote that he saw Fraser “on Saturday (if I remember correctly for that date).”

Miske Did Not Testify

Miske remained undecided until late Monday about whether he would take the stand but eventually opted not to testify. 

Ken Lawson, co-director of the Hawaii Innocence Project, said it can be difficult for defense attorneys to decide if they should advise their clients to take the stand or not because there are pros and cons to both. Ultimately, the Fifth Amendment, which protects a person from self incrimination, allows criminal defendants to waive their right to testify.

When advising their clients, attorneys have to weigh the possibility that there may be jurors who think it looks bad if a defendant doesn’t testify because they assume an innocent person would take the stand, Lawson said. On the other hand, it’s hard to predict how a defendant will be perceived if he or she testifies, and jurors may have a hard time believing the testimony, especially if the person faces serious charges and a lengthy sentence.

“As a lawyer, you are between a rock and a hard place,” he said. 

In a complex federal conspiracy case like this one, it may make more sense for a client to avoid the risk of taking the stand and lean on the fact that the government carries the burden of proving the charges beyond a reasonable doubt, Lawson said.

The court will be in recess until July 11 when the government is scheduled to present its closing argument. The defense’s closing argument is scheduled for July 12, and the jury is expected to begin deliberations on July 15.