Click here to view the Barristers Website.
David Rivera
Yes, you read the title right. For the uninitiated, the Chewbacca Defense is the comedic legal strategy born of the confluence between Star Wars, Johnnie Cochran, and South Park. Still a bit lost?
Meet the players: Star Wars is, well… Star Wars. Chewbacca is the franchise's mighty, iconic Silverback Wookiee. Johnnie Cochran is the criminal defense attorney of O.J. Simpson trial fame. South Park is the critically acclaimed animated sitcom. It features the antics of four school-age boys—Stan, Kyle, Cartman, and Kenny—as they grow up in a small Colorado town. The show is irreverent, punctuated by profanity, dark humor, and biting pop culture parodies. It is flat-out hilarious! An "all persons fictitious" disclaimer precedes each episode, many of which depict celebrities (e.g., Chewbacca and Johnnie Cochran).
At its core, the Chewbacca Defense is an attempt by counsel (in a case with bad facts) to confuse a jury with irrelevant information, so that it is unable to decide a case in a rational manner. This article examines the origin of the Chewbacca Defense, discusses the legal strategy behind it, and provides a quick look at its surprising, yet extremely limited, place in American jurisprudence.
The Chewbacca Defense dates back more than 25 years to an episode of South Park titled, "Chef Aid." The episode is a satirical portrayal of the infamous O. J. Simpson murder trial.
Alanis Morissette, Canadian American singer-songwriter, has just released a new hit song, "Stinky Britches." Jerome "Chef" McElroy, South Park Elementary cafeteria cook and a mentor of sorts to the boys, overhears Cartman singing Stinky Britches. He recognizes it as rip-off of a song he wrote, sang, and recorded 20 years prior. Chef confronts Alanis' record producer and recording company, Capitalist Records, to request that his name be credited to the song. Capitalist Records refuses. It retains Johnnie Cochran and sues Chef for harassment in a case that is treated—solely for confusion's sake—as both a criminal and civil matter. Adding to the confusion, both parties are cast in defensive postures despite the absence of any counterclaim.
Chef's attorney, Stan's dad, delivers a lucid, rational closing argument. Then the fun begins. Johnnie Cochran walks to a display stand, unfurls a picture of Chewbacca, and provides his closing through comical delivery.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca.Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about that. That does not make sense.
Why would a Wookiee, an 8-foot-tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor with a bunch of 2-foot-tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more important [sic], you have to ask yourself, "What does this have to do with this case?" Nothing.
Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense! Look at me, I'm a lawyer defending a major record company, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca. Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberating and conjugating the Emancipation Proclamation... does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit!
South Park: Chef Aid (Comedy Central Oct. 7, 1998).
The jury finds for Capitalist Records. The judge orders Chef to pay damages of $2 million within 24 hours or go to jail for 8 million years (later corrected to 4 years).
The Chewbacca Defense as presented in South Park is completely nonsensical. It is not a formal legal strategy. Even so, let's take a stab at dissecting it. It serves as a tool of persuasion. Though absurd in its message, its objectives are sound—confuse, distract, emphasize emotion.
The Chewbacca Defense trades in distraction over clear direction. It seeks to obfuscate, not clarify. It shifts focus away from the core issues of an argument, often introducing irrelevant facts for a jury's consideration. It casts doubt into jurors' minds, causing them to question their understanding of a case. When confused, jurors can be more receptive to simplicity, storytelling, and impression.
The Chewbacca Defense then administers the coup de grâce. It appeals to emotion over rational thought. Sometimes it amuses, leaning into feelings rather than facts. It highlights a persuasive narrative over truth as a basis for justice, no matter how nonsensical that narrative might be.
BAM! Two million dollars. Eight million years in prison. Thank you very much.
Surprise! The Chewbacca Defense has indeed been brought to bear in an American court, though not in the obvious way.
At trail, a jury returned a conviction against defendant Moise on numerous counts of filing false tax returns after a prosecutor likened defense counsel's closing argument to the Chewbacca Defense. Moise owned and operated tax-return-preparation companies. Evidence showed that he included false information on his clients' tax returns and his own individual returns to minimize tax liabilities.
During closing, Moise's counsel pointed out that prior to indictment, the Department of Justice told IRS agents to revise Moise's income and expenses based on a more conservative methodology. Defense counsel said that the agents' work "was so bad" that the jury could not rely on the revised calculations or the agents' testimony.
In rebuttal, the prosecutor countered that the agents' calculations were not directly relevant to Moise's guilt or innocence, that they had "nothing to do with this case." The prosecutor—referencing South Park, Johnnie Cochran, and the Chewbacca Defense—continued:
…[S]ome of you [in the jury] may have seen it. I think it's a South Park episode… there's a character… who… 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 Wookiee from Star Wars. And he said, "That's a Wookiee. What does that have to do with this case?" Nothing. That doesn't make any sense. This case doesn't make any sense.
United States v. Moise, 21-13424, at *4, *6 (11th Cir. Nov. 01, 2022) (FastCase).
On appeal, Moise challenged his convictions arguing that the prosecutor's "shyster attorney" comment discredited his attorney and poisoned the jury's mind against him. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeal unanimously affirmed the lower court's decision, explaining that although the prosecutor's "[shyster] remark was improper… [the] court [found]… nothing in the record to suggest that Moise was prejudiced by the… comment." Additionally, the court noted that it was a single comment in an eight-day trial with nothing to indicate that it permeated the entire trial.
Notwithstanding Moise alluding to the Chewbacca Defense, its success remains limited to the fictional world of South Park.
The Chewbacca Defense is a hilarious, nonsensical legal strategy that debuted in a South Park episode satirizing the O. J. Simpson murder trial. Boiled down, it asserts that it doesn't make sense for Chewbacca, an eight-foot-tall Wookiee, to live on the planet Endor with two-foot-tall Ewoks. None of it makes sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, the jury must acquit!
Though not an authentic legal strategy, the Chewbacca Defense has found its way into at least one American court. While its purpose is rooted in sound logic—confuse, distract, emphasize emotion—the Chewbacca Defense is much more successful as comedy than legal strategy.
"Laugh it up, Fuzzball!"
Wine Tasting in Temecula Valley through Grapeline Wine Tours. June 8, 10:15 a.m.–5:30 p.m. That's right! We're hitting Temecula for wine tasting to mark the near-end of our 2023–2024 term. The idea for this event began at least three years ago and it's finally here! Enjoy pick-up and drop-off in downtown Riverside via chartered bus, with an additional stop in Old Town Temecula for those who would like to join the party from there. Register at https://RCBABarristersWineTour.eventbrite.com.
ELECTIONS! June 20, 5:30 p.m. at the Mission Inn's Presidential Lounge. The success of Barristers is dependent not only on our members' active participation, but on the leadership of our board. Active Barristers members are encouraged to vote. Your vote counts!
Wine Tasting in Temecula Valley through Grapeline Wine Tours. June 8, 10:15 a.m.–4:30 p.m. That’s right! We’re hitting Temecula for wine tasting to mark the near-end of our 2023–2024 term. The idea for this event began at least three years ago and it’s finally here! Enjoy pick-up and drop-off in downtown Riverside via chartered bus, with a possible stop in Old Town Temecula for those who would like to join the party from there. Register at https://RCBABarristersWineTour.eventbrite.com.
ELECTIONS! June 20, 5:30 p.m. at the Mission Inn’s Presidential Lounge. Active Barristers members are encouraged to run for office! The success of Barristers is dependent not only on our members’ active participation, but on the leadership of our board. Your vote counts! Would you like to serve on the Barristers Board 2024–2025, or do you know someone who would be a great fit? Contact us at barristers@riversidecountybar.com for nominations information. Nominations are due on or before May 17.
If you have any suggestions as to possible events or activities, or comments on Barristers affairs, please email us at barristers@riversidecountybar.com.
Contact me directly by email at drivera@alumni.nd.edu, or by text or phone call at (909) 844-7397. If you are just discovering Barristers and would like to attend one of our events, I am more than happy to meet you at the door and introduce you to our wonderful group. Truly. I look forward to hearing from you!
David P. Rivera is a solo practitioner of business law in Highland. He is the President of the Riverside County Barristers Association, the Treasurer of the Hispanic Bar Association of the Inland Empire, the Treasurer of the Asian Pacific American Lawyers of the Inland Empire, and a member of the RCBA Bar Publications Committee.
