But prosecutors continued to insist that it is simply illegal to take stolen money and invest it in the United States. Regardless of the bigger questions, the Marcoses defrauded two US banks, they said, by hiding their identities as owners of the buildings while taking out loans.
A surreal test
Problems aside, the process had a surreal quality that never faded. Every day Mrs. Marcos sat at a table surrounded by four lawyers. She always wore a black mourning dress. In the gallery sat her sister, a nun, and many of her supporters and opponents, who often competed with protest banners for space on the courthouse steps.
Twice, under the tension of the trial, Ms. Marcos burst into tears and on one occasion she collapsed and had to be hospitalized.
At the end of yesterday, as the courtroom went silent, the former First Lady, trembling with rosary in hand, faced the jury foreman, a retired office worker. After the verdict, Mr. Spence raised his hands above his head and applauded.
He had been ruthless in his portrayal of Mrs. Marcos as “a small, frail widow,” who knew little about large investments, even in the face of many testimonies to the contrary. He was challenged by a thin line that led him to destroy Mr. Marcos while separating his wife from his actions.
”Mrs. Marcos has committed no crime, except the crime of loving a man for 35 years, raising his children, being his First Lady, being his ardent supporter, accepting his lavish gifts,” Mr Spence said.
The prosecution team, led by Assistant United States Attorneys Charles G. LaBella and Debra A. Livingston, stuck to a more traditional approach, emphasizing flowcharts showing the path Marcos money took from Manila to Hong Kong. Kong, Switzerland, Italy and finally New York.