Manafort defense rests without calling witnesses: Update--Jury Questions

[mystery-ak]

Manafort defense rests without calling witnesses
By The Hill staff - 08/14/18 12:05 PM EDT

The defense in Paul Manafort's case has rested its case without calling witnesses.

The decision on Tuesday comes in the third week of the former Trump campaign chairman's trial. Manafort faces a total of 18 criminal counts — five counts of tax fraud, four counts of failing to report foreign bank and financial accounts and nine counts of bank fraud and bank fraud conspiracy.

Manafort faces up to 10 years in prison for tax fraud alone based on the level of the offense and his criminal history, federal prosecutors said in a February court filing.

DEVELOPING

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/401748-manafort-defense-rests-without-calling-witnesses

[Hoodat]

Not sure what any of this has to do with the Müller probe, but the prosecution's case here is mighty weak.  The testimony of their star witness was self-serving.  And he was paid by the Justice Department.

[Bigun]

Not sure what any of this has to do with the Müller probe, but the prosecution's case here is mighty weak.  The testimony of their star witness was self-serving.  And he was paid by the Justice Department.

Which means they made no case and therefore there was no need for the defense to do anything but rest.

[Wingnut]

It is brilliant.   

I see several days of delib comming.  By friday if not found not guilty or when no verdict has been reached it will prove Mueller is a dickless wonder and a partisan hack.

[truth_seeker]

What was the charge again?

Manafort is a Russian, and he colluded with Trump in order to alter the outcome of the 2016 election?

[Bigun]

What was the charge again?

Manafort is a Russian, and he colluded with Trump in order to alter the outcome of the 2016 election?

No! Manafort made a lot of money and maybe didn't pay taxes on some of it!  Trump should have known this and refused to0 co0lude with Manafort!  /s

[Right_in_Virginia]

It is brilliant.   

I see several days of delib comming.  By friday if not found not guilty or when no verdict has been reached it will prove Mueller is a dickless wonder and a partisan hack.

I agree this was a smart move.  It's not up to the defense to prove innocence, it's up to the prosecution to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.  Methinks the defense team must be pretty certain the prosecution hasn't done this.

I'm also glad Manafort didn't take the stand.  There was nothing to be gained by giving Mueller's thugs a chance to rip into him.

Closing arguments begin tomorrow at 9:15 am.  IMO, this is where the case will be won or lost ---or thrown into a hung jury.

@The Ghost

[Wingnut]

Manafort Jury asks Judge to define reasonable doubt.

 Jury asks 4 questions, including query about reasonable doubt

The note, delivered to Judge Ellis minutes ago, contains four questions from the jury. The judge heard argument from both sides as to the answers.

Court is now dismissed for the day, and the jury will resume deliberations at 9:30 a.m. Friday.

Here are the questions from the jury, and the answers the judge gave. 

https://www.nbcnews.com/card/jury-delivers-note-judge-four-questions-n901446

[Right_in_Virginia]

First, jurors asked if someone was required to file a form called an FBAR — which is required of people with foreign bank accounts containing more than $10,000 — if they owned less than 50 percent of such an account and did not have signature authority but did have the ability to direct disbursement.

At trial, Manafort’s lawyers suggested their client might have believed he did not have to file such forms, because the companies in question were set up under his consulting firm. After 2011, he shared ownership of the firm equally with his wife. In response, the judge read to them again the legal instructions he had provided on that point Wednesday.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/jury-begins-deliberations-in-paul-manaforts-tax--and-bank-fraud-trial/2018/08/16/d2b0f486-a170-11e8-8e87-c869fe70a721_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.9060882cdb3f

[Right_in_Virginia]

Second, jurors asked if the judge could define “shelf company” and the filing requirements related to income. Witnesses testified at Manafort’s trial that he used so-called shelf companies — companies previously created by a lawyer in Cyprus that could be used to control the bank accounts in question — in order to move Manafort’s money. To that question, the judge said the jury would have to rely on their memory of the evidence presented at trial.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/jury-begins-deliberations-in-paul-manaforts-tax--and-bank-fraud-trial/2018/08/16/d2b0f486-a170-11e8-8e87-c869fe70a721_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.9060882cdb3f

[Right_in_Virginia]

Third, they asked if the judge could “redefine reasonable doubt.” Jurors sometimes struggle with what constitutes a reasonable doubt of someone’s guilt, versus an unreasonable doubt. The judge told them reasonable doubt “is a doubt based on reason,” but added: “The government is not required to prove guilt beyond all possible doubt.”

Defense attorneys emphasized in their closing argument that it’s not enough to believe a defendant is “likely” guilty or even “highly likely” guilty, using a thermometer chart to make the point.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/jury-begins-deliberations-in-paul-manaforts-tax--and-bank-fraud-trial/2018/08/16/d2b0f486-a170-11e8-8e87-c869fe70a721_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.9060882cdb3f

[Right_in_Virginia]

Fourth, the jurors asked if they could have an updated exhibit list, connecting each piece of evidence to the corresponding charge in the indictment. The judge said they would have to rely on their collective memory to link exhibits to specific charges.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/jury-begins-deliberations-in-paul-manaforts-tax--and-bank-fraud-trial/2018/08/16/d2b0f486-a170-11e8-8e87-c869fe70a721_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.9060882cdb3f

[Right_in_Virginia]

I'm not an attorney, but it sure seems like #4 could be used in the appeals process. 

[Hoodat]

I'm not an attorney, but it sure seems like #4 could be used in the appeals process.

The judge's response to #4 was the correct one.  It was the prosecutor's job to do that.

[Right_in_Virginia]

The judge's response to #4 was the correct one.  It was the prosecutor's job to do that.

I agree ... but the jury sounds awfully confused.  How can anyone be sure they're matching the right exhibit with the right charge?

[Hoodat]

They can't, which is good news for the defense.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Ryan J. Reilly
Verified accountï‚™ @ryanjreilly 

Manafort defense team had used a chart (kind of like this) to emphasize how high of a burden reasonable doubt is, so it makes sense that jurors might want some clarity from the judge. Defense told jurors to “hold the government to its burden.”



2:26 PM - 16 Aug 2018

https://twitter.com/ryanjreilly/status/1030204085235011585

[corbe]

  I've seen this movie, most of US know Manafort is guilty as hell, but dumb azz juries will let him go.



   Manafort acquitted, Trade Talks with China opening up, looks like I picked a hell of a week to be a NT'er.

[endicom]

The prosecution may have buried itself in a pile of confusing details. How is a jury to follow complicated transactions when seeing/hearing them but once?

[Bigun]

What this all boils down to is that the Mueller team NEVER expected to have to try this in a courtroom and when they were finally forced to do so they cobbled something together as best they could. 


We'll see if it was enough to get a conviction on even one charge.  There is no accounting for what juries might do.

[ConstitutionRose]

The prosecution may have buried itself in a pile of confusing details. How is a jury to follow complicated transactions when seeing/hearing them but once?

I think you may be right.  It would have been better to simplify, that includes making fewer charges also.  My husband told me today he sort of hopes Manafort gets off even though he thinks Manafort may be guilty of something.  He is not a Trump fan, but he sees the fact that Manafort is on trial NOW for things that were investigated years ago as political.  Doesn't like the political aspects of this. 

[Bigun]

I think you may be right.  It would have been better to simplify, that includes making fewer charges also.  My husband told me today he sort of hopes Manafort gets off even though he thinks Manafort may be guilty of something.  He is not a Trump fan, but he sees the fact that Manafort is on trial NOW for things that were investigated years ago as political.  Doesn't like the political aspects of this.

@ConstitutionRose

For whatever it's worth to you, I completely agree with your husband's analysis.