Feel free to have sympathy on the victim’s families for their losses. However, you should have SEEN how these victims/familiy members treated the members of Hugo's family. They blurted out threats at them (and I mean threats on their lives), they pushed them in the lines at the court room doors, and they were nothing but trashy people with very misplaced anger to take it out on Hugo's family! Do any of you even realize what the state did for them? The state paid for them to stay at a hotel the duration of the trial, paid for ALL of their meals, and treated them like gold (even though they were actually just as scared of these urban drug dealers as everyone else was). Originally the state agreed to pay for the two mothers and the one brother, then the girlfriends showed up with children, and the grandmother showed up, and other family members just kept coming out of the woodworks - and the state didn't want to rock the boat and put their foot down, so they just kept paying for everything! Yes, they are entitled to be at the trial just like any one else was, but it should have been at their own expense. Hugo had many family members at his trial that sat through long grueling days with nothing paid for them. I just think everyone needs to look at both sides of this. If the state had such a strong case, then why did they feel they had to pick up that HUGE tab? Yes, this case was very costly to the state, but most of the expenses were unnecessarily created by the state themselves!

The defense called it's next witness, inmate Joseph Simpson. It was just like the scene from "The Green Mile" when John Coffey walked into the jail in the beginning of the movie. Everyone stared in AWE as this huge black inmate walked into the court room on Thursday. Simpson went on to tell the court how Pat Russin got special treatment at the prison.

Then Simpson explained how the inmates played a game called the "grind" where they all yell remarks to each other in order to get each other going. Or in other words, it's fighting from behind bars.

Agitated by the constant heckles of “Pat the Rat” from his fellow inmates, Patrick Russin finally lost his cool, another inmate said.

Russin, from inside his solitary-confinement cell, loudly shot back at the inmates who mocked him, saying he shouldn’t be considered a “rat” for telling police about Hugo Selenski’s alleged shotgun slayings of two drug dealer suspects.

“I’m not a rat because I’m lying,” Russin blurted out during a game called “the grind” at the State Correctional Institution at Retreat.

“If I were telling the truth I’d be a rat.”

Unfortunately prosecutors were relying heavily on the story of Patrick Russin to convict Hugo Selenski, but inmate Simpson's very damaging testimony was the defense's "key" weapon to discredit the prosecution's "key" witness Patrick Russin.

Two hours and 12 witnesses were all attorney Demetrius Fannick required to defend his client, Hugo Selenski, against two charges of first-degree murder.

By comparison, the prosecution called 38 witnesses over the first six days of the trial.

“I felt it’s all I needed,” Fannick said of his brief defense. “I don’t think you could look at a criminal case as one side starts and then the other side starts. I think your defense starts with (the cross examination of) the first Commonwealth witness.”

As Hugo Selenski and lead defense attorney Demetrius Fannick slowly approached Luzerne County Judge Peter Paul Olszewski Jr. on Thursday morning, an entire courtroom of spectators sat on the edge of their seats waiting to hear whether Selenski would testify in his own defense.

"Mr. Selenski, do you need any more time to make a final decision?” Judge Olszewski asked.

“No, I’m comfortable,” Selenski said.

“Are you prepared now to make the decision?” the judge asked.

“Yes,” Selenski responded.

“Your decision is what?” Olszewski asked.

“I’m declining (to testify),” Selenski answered.

Olszewski also posed a series of questions to Selenski about whether Fannick clearly explained the defendant’s right to testify or refrain from testifying. A defendant, not his or her attorney, makes the final decision, Olszewski told Selenski.

Prior to his decision, court was recessed while Selenski left the courtroom to confer with Fannick. The jury was dismissed during Selenski’s questioning by the judge.

Selenski told Olszewski he was satisfied with Fannick’s explanation and fully understood it was his decision.

After the proceeding, when asked why Selenski did not take the stand, Fannick replied, “There is really not an easy or short answer to that.”

Selenski changed his mind about testifying several times, Fannick said.

“We all felt at the time the decision needed to be made, it was better not to testify,” Fannick said.

It also appeared at one point Thursday afternoon Selenski changed his mind. When court reconvened after lunch, Selenski and Fannick again approached the bench.

It turned out court personnel inadvertently forgot to put Selenski under oath during Olszewski’s questions earlier that morning.

“Can I assume all you answers earlier today were truthful?” Olszewski asked once Selenski was under oath.

“Yeah,” Selenski responded.

CNN sent a reporting team and a camera crew to the Times Leader newsroom Tuesday night to get the skinny on the Hugo Selenski double murder trial. City Editor Brian Malina and courts reporter Dave Weiss, who has covered the Selenki saga from the get-go, were interviewed about the accused, the public interest in the case, and our coverage of the story. The cable news network is going to remain in town at least for the opening arguments. We expect the segment that includes a look at our coverage to air later this week, probably Thursday. Keep looking at this site and I’ll let you know when I get a schedule from CNN.