Expert warns Routh’s self-representation could prove ‘disastrous’ in Trump assassination case

Ryan Routh – accused of attempting to assassinate President Donald Trump when he was a major candidate in the 2024 election at his Florida golf club last year – has chosen to represent himself in court, a decision one legal expert says could prove disastrous.

Cully Simson, a former prosecutor, defense attorney and judge, told Fox News Digital that while the Constitution guarantees the right to self-representation, it’s “almost always a mistake.”

“It really makes no sense for somebody to defend themselves, especially in a serious case,” he said. “They have the right to do it, but it’s not prudent.” 

RYAN ROUTH TRIAL OPENS WITH BIZARRE JURY QUESTIONS AND WITNESS DRAMA

Self-representation creates risks and an unusual courtroom dynamic where the judge and prosecutor “have to pull their punches” to protect the record, and essentially “protect the defendant from himself.”

A seasoned defense attorney knows how to put prosecutors to the test, forcing them to prove every element of the case and carefully laying the groundwork for potential appeals. When a defendant represents himself, Simson said, that kind of strategy is completely missing.

“And so what ends up happening is the judge and the prosecutor has to play, in a weird way, a defensive role, in addition to the role of the judge being a neutral and impartial arbiter of the law, and the prosecutor just be the person who advocates on behalf of the government. You have to essentially protect the defendant from himself, and that is so much more difficult,” he said.

RYAN ROUTH TRIAL: JURY SELECTION BEGINS IN TRUMP ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT CASE

Jury selection for the trial of Ryan Routh, who is accused of attempting to assassinate President Donald Trump, kicked off on Monday.  (LOTHAR SPEER)

Simson said defense attorneys typically “push the envelope” and force the government to object, but when someone is representing themselves, lawyers hold back “because he’s not going to be smart enough or educated enough to object.”

This can sometimes create an atmosphere where a “right to a fair trial” can become skewed – and it’s something law students study, too.

“That’s that sophisticated point that law students talk about, and lawyers talk about. If you had a public defender or a private defense counsel who wasn’t very good and made a number of mistakes…