Manafort Trial

[Chad Fuck 17259]

And we would’ve gotten away with it too! If it weren’t for these meddling kids...

[Biff Tannen 44917]

So is today the day?

[Poolflood 845]

So what's the betting line on how long before the jury comes back with convictions?  

[Homercles 10162]

So what's the betting line on how long before the jury comes back with convictions?  

About +350

[Gil Bang 25507]

Jurors had questions.

 

Analysis please.

 

Judge T.S. Ellis told the courtroom Thursday he would instruct the jury to rely on their "collective recollection" regarding their questions on "shelf" companies and foreign banking filing requirements. He would give them no further answers on those points. 

Regarding their question about "reasonable doubt" — the legal threshold for acquitting a defendant — he said that the prosecutors had to prove their case not "beyond possible doubt," but beyond "doubt based on reason."

The jury had also asked if the court could match exhibit numbers to indictments. Ellis said the court could not amend the exhibit list.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Gil Bang

[Biff Tannen 44917]

So the jury is the common clay of the new west?

[Dahobbs 17088]

Here is the best I can find on the content of the questions - https://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/jury-submits-note-to-court-in-paul-manafort-trial:

The first question was about the requirements to file FBAR reports. At the request of prosecutor Greg Andres, Judge Ellis re-read the jury instructions about the law regarding FBAR reports.

The second question asked for a definition of “shelf” companies, and their filing requirements. Ellis told the jury they will have to rely on their collective recollection from the testimony and evidence in the trial.

The third question asked to redefine or give explanation of the term reasonable doubt. Ellis responded that reasonable doubt means “doubt based on reason,” and that the government is not required to prove guilt beyond “all possible doubt.”

The final question asked by the jury was whether the exhibit list in the case could be amended to reflect the indictment counts. Ellis said no, that jurors must rely on their memory of which exhibits were used during certain parts of testimony.

[Brisketexan 103143]

27 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

Jurors had questions.

 

Analysis please.

 

Judge T.S. Ellis told the courtroom Thursday he would instruct the jury to rely on their "collective recollection" regarding their questions on "shelf" companies and foreign banking filing requirements. He would give them no further answers on those points. 

Regarding their question about "reasonable doubt" — the legal threshold for acquitting a defendant — he said that the prosecutors had to prove their case not "beyond possible doubt," but beyond "doubt based on reason."

The jury had also asked if the court could match exhibit numbers to indictments. Ellis said the court could not amend the exhibit list.

 

25 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

So the jury is the common clay of the new west?

Not necessarily.  Those sound like fair questions, all in all.  And as to the last one, that's on the prosecution.  One of the tedious things you need to do in your closing argument in a complex case is to directly flag the jury to the evidence they need to consider on each cause of action/count.

"How do we know that the purpose of transaction X was to avoid taxes, which is the second count you're charged with deciding?  The testimony of Gates.  Exhibit 4, the transfer documents, Exhibit 5, the email from Gates to Manafort about it, Exhibit 6, the email from Manafort to Gates in reply [etc. etc.]"  If there's a stack of shit in front of 'em, you need to tell 'em what to look at.

[Ghost of LL 15225]

The question about reasonable doubt is probably good for the prosecution.  You have some jurors in there confused about what constitutes "reasonable doubt," and the judge's answer lets them know that the standard is a lot lower than a lot of lay people think.  It's not "possible doubt"--yeah, it could be that space aliens came down and added a bunch of zeros to Manafort's bank account unbeknownst to him, but that's not reasonable doubt.

All-in-all, those strike me as reasonable and commonplace questions that you would expect to get out of a jury in a case like this.

[tantric superman 4667]

FOREMAN:
                         Are we permitted to award an amount 
                         greater than the amount the Government 
                         asked for?

               Galvin slowly raises his head, turns and looks at the Jury, 
               Mickey begins to smile.

                                     JUDGE
                         Yes. You are.

[sidis 9608]

[horncyclist 1351]

I think we'll see a verdict tomorrow. Felony Friday and all.

[TwiceHorn 30715]

The one thing I began to wonder about the day I looked at the counts against Manafort, was, did the government overcharge here?  I believe that they are unlikely to get stacking of the sentences, except for maybe the tax evasion plus the bank fraud, so having all these counts of the same crime serves no purpose and can only confuse the jury.

[Kyrie Eleison 9247]

The one thing I began to wonder about the day I looked at the counts against Manafort, was, did the government overcharge here?  I believe that they are unlikely to get stacking of the sentences, except for maybe the tax evasion plus the bank fraud, so having all these counts of the same crime serves no purpose and can only confuse the jury.

i know you’re a lawyer, and by all accounts a helluva P/T lawyer, which means you’ve spent a good amount of time in a courtroom.

but as a criminal case you’re looking at this wholly and completely wrong.

they only need a guilty on one count.

think about it...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TwiceHorn 30715]

23 minutes ago, Kyrie Eleison said:

 

i know you’re a lawyer, and by all accounts a helluva P/T lawyer, which means you’ve spent a good amount of time in a courtroom.

but as a criminal case you’re looking at this wholly and completely wrong.

they only need a guilty on one count.

think about it...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Fair point.

I am aware, however, that occasionally the government will whittle down somewhat duplicative charges (I assume here every tax return was a count and every loan and bank defrauded was a count, so not totally duplicative), for the purpose of simplifying for the jury.

Certainly done in civil cases a lot.

Just a thought out loud.

Edited August 17, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[Gil Bang 25507]

P/T???

[Kyrie Eleison 9247]

patent/trademark


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[woohorn 1130]

P/T???

IP???

[Kyrie Eleison 9247]

Fair point.
I am aware, however, that occasionally the government will whittle down somewhat duplicative charges (I assume here every tax return was a count and every loan and bank defrauded was a count, so not totally duplicative), for the purpose of simplifying for the jury.
Certainly done in civil cases a lot.
Just a thought out loud.

not quite...it’s a strategic thing, yes. but the rules differ from civil cases re: “same transaction or occurrence,” to use the language of civil procedure.

they could have brought 18 different cases one by one here if they chose to do so.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WhatTheBuck 28574]

20 minutes ago, woohorn said:

28 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

P/T???

IP???

Are you a Russian hooker? 

[yaqdum 182]

58 minutes ago, woohorn said:

1 hour ago, Gil Bang said:

P/T???

IP???

os, ip2.

[conVINCEd 21468]

58 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Are you a Russian hooker? 

Pm sent

[Brisketexan 103143]

Are you a Russian hooker? 

Wait...are you NOT?

[zork 629]

On 8/10/2018 at 12:23 PM, Anastasis said:

How many federal charges will Paul Manafort be convicted on by year-end 2018?

Market Type: Linked

End Date: 12/31/2018 11:59 PM (ET)

Status: Open

 

• Contracts
• Rules
• Chart

Trade shares from this page by clicking any price in bold. For more information on an individual prediction, click on the name or image.

GUILTY.MANA.2018	Latest	Buy Yes	Sell Yes	Buy No	Sell No
0 charges 0.GUILTY.MANA.2018	13¢  5¢	13¢	8¢	92¢	87¢
1 - 5 charges 1.GUILTY.MANA.2018	7¢  1¢	8¢	7¢	93¢	92¢
6 - 10 charges 6.GUILTY.MANA.2018	15¢ NC	9¢	4¢	96¢	91¢
11 - 20 charges 11.GUILTY.MANA.2018	34¢  1¢	35¢	20¢	80¢	65¢
21 - 30 charges 21.GUILTY.MANA.2018	30¢  20¢	30¢	26¢	74¢	70¢
31 - 40 charges 31.GUILTY.MANA.2018	8¢ NC	15¢	4¢	96¢	85¢
41 or more charges 41.GUILTY.MANA.2018	5¢  2¢	5¢	3¢	97¢	95¢

 

---

The Disqus comment section is for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon when making any decision to buy or sell shares. PredictIt does not monitor, evaluate, or assess the accuracy of comments. PredictIt participants should seek out independent, verifiable information before making any investment decision.

big moves today on:

guilt on 1-5    +.17

guilt on 6-10  +.13

guilt on 21-30   -.27

https://www.predictit.org/Market/4674/How-many-federal-charges-will-Paul-Manafort-be-convicted-on-by-year-end-2018

 

Five years for each guilty verdict do you suppose? (WAG)

[TwiceHorn 30715]

31 minutes ago, zork said:

big moves today on:

guilt on 1-5    +.17

guilt on 6-10  +.13

guilt on 21-30   -.27

https://www.predictit.org/Market/4674/How-many-federal-charges-will-Paul-Manafort-be-convicted-on-by-year-end-2018

 

Five years for each guilty verdict do you suppose? (WAG)

No.  If by "guilty verdict" you mean guilty per count.  It doesn't work like that.  Initially, all sentences for each count will run concurrently.  The judge can make them run consecutively, but that is abnormal.  The max for bank fraud is 30 years.  For false tax return, it's 5 years.  Where along the spectrum of 0 to 30 and 0 to 5 the judge lands is initially up to the sentencing guidelines, where one of the most influential factors is the amount lost.  I have seen some thumbnail predictions of 15-20 from experienced "white collar" defense types.

But, we won't know how the guideline calculus works out until sentencing memoranda are filed by the parties after conviction and prior to sentencing.

Also, Ellis is hostile to extreme sentences resulting from mechanical application of the guidelines, or doing things like "stacking" (making sentences run consecutively).  http://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/2018/07/notable-district-judge-struggles-against-mandatory-minimums-especially-stacked-gun-charges.html

There are certain provisions of the federal criminal code that require stacking and Ellis pretty violently dislikes them, so I think it's fair to say he won't stack these.

Edited August 17, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[David Dennison 17659]

Paul's September trial in D.C. is gonna be fun.

[TwiceHorn 30715]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

Paul's September trial in D.C. is gonna be fun.

I'd be super-surprised if it didn't move again, several months.  I dunno.  I guess sentencing in this one could be pushed back to accommodate the other trial. 

[SmokeyTheBear 5551]

Happy felony Friday!

[Tuco 5003]

Fair point.
I am aware, however, that occasionally the government will whittle down somewhat duplicative charges (I assume here every tax return was a count and every loan and bank defrauded was a count, so not totally duplicative), for the purpose of simplifying for the jury.
Certainly done in civil cases a lot.
Just a thought out loud.

I assume the flip side is the multiple counts give the jury an opportunity to compromise. 3 out of 5 bank fraud convictions seems like the moderate, restrained decision, even if it doesn’t impact the sentence.

[Message Board User 12382]

 

[Biff Tannen 44917]

[TwiceHorn 30715]

2 hours ago, Tuco said:

I assume the flip side is the multiple counts give the jury an opportunity to compromise. 3 out of 5 bank fraud convictions seems like the moderate, restrained decision, even if it doesn’t impact the sentence.

Yeah, I think that's KE's point.  They only have to convict on one.  It's kind of a tension between "shooting with a rifle or shooting with a shotgun."

[Gil Bang 25507]

[HOOK'EMHOOAH 1600]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah, I think that's KE's point.  They only have to convict on one.  It's kind of a tension between "shooting with a rifle or shooting with a shotgun."

Either way, he's done gone hunting with VP Dick Cheney.

[yaqdum 182]

[Kyrie Eleison 9247]

[udaydanceparty 33]

Why are media organizations trying to dox the jurors in this case?  Judge Ellis just squashed a request by the media to release the names of the jury. 

He also has US Marshals following him thanks to credible threats on his life.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/08/17/judge-in-manafort-trial-says-hes-been-threatened-over-case.html

Quote

The judge in Paul Manafort’s fraud trial said Friday he has received threats over the case.

U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III made the comments as the jury deliberated for the second day, and as he rejected a motion to release information about the jurors. He said he's confident the jurors would be threatened as well if their information was public. 

Ellis said that because of the threats against him, he travels with U.S. Marshals. 

 

“The Marshals go where I go,” Ellis said.

Earlier Friday morning, Ellis, a famously prickly judge known for his colorful comments, acknowledged facing criticism about how he’s handled this case.

At one point, Ellis told attorneys “I’m no stranger to criticism,” but said “this case has brought it to a new level.”

A number of news organizations – the Washington Post, New York Times, AP, CNN, NBC, Politico and BuzzFeed – filed a motion to unseal all the records so far in the Manafort case.

But in rejecting the motion, Ellis said he doesn’t “feel right” about releasing the names of jurors, saying, “to do so would create a risk of harm to them.”

The judge also denied a motion to unseal all the bench conferences and sidebars, which have been sealed. Ellis said all that will be released to the public at the end of this trial.

After a trial spanning nearly three weeks, Manafort, 69, is awaiting a verdict on tax evasion and bank fraud charges.

He has been accused of hiding income earned from his Ukrainian political work from the IRS. He’s also accused of fraudulently obtaining millions in bank loans.

 

[Message Board User 12382]

 

[scottsins 1921]

 

That lawyer is just bullshitting. Trying to read those tea leaves of juries is a fool’s errand at best.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

I do think that the question about reasonable doubt is defendant friendly.  I think that leads to people focusing conversations on whether there is a doubt instead of the facts of the case, which leads to "well, we've been discussing it this long, of course there is a doubt."

[DDD Dad 14060]

35 minutes ago, scottsins said:

 

That lawyer is just bullshitting. Trying to read those tea leaves of juries is a fool’s errand at best.

 

More like whistling through the graveyard, if you ask me.

[TwiceHorn 30715]

I find it odd that I keep seeing these articles criticizing Ellis' courtroom behavior.  Seems to me anyone that's been involved in federal litigation knows that there is a federal district judge sitting in a courtroom somewhere right this minute abusing counsel for one or both parties.  This isnt the first high-profile case Ellis has tried and I am quite certain that there are other cantankerous federal judges presiding over high-profile trials without getting raked over the coals.  I guess it's just the Trump connection.

[Brisketexan 103143]

23 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Seems to me anyone that's been involved in federal litigation knows that there is a federal district judge sitting in a courtroom somewhere right this minute abusing counsel for one or both parties. 

I'm sure you've had cases covered by the media.  God bless 'em, but they generally have no clue how things actually work in a courtroom.

[Dahobbs 17088]

19 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I'm sure you've had cases covered by the media.  God bless 'em, but they generally have no clue how things actually work in a courtroom.

In fact, have you ever seen a case or legal issue accurately described by the media? Whenever my wife asks me about something she read in the news regarding a legal issue, I tell her they probably got pretty much everything wrong. 

[DDD Dad 14060]

Reminds me of virtually every TV show that tries to depict courtroom scenes.  So few get it even close to accurate.

[Brisketexan 103143]

19 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

Reminds me of virtually every TV show that tries to depict courtroom scenes.  So few get it even close to accurate.

Sure.  Because accurate is fucking BOOOOORRRRING.

[deech 2222]

20 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Sure.  Because accurate is fucking BOOOOORRRRING.

Has any movie ever even covered a charge conference?  LOL 

[DDD Dad 14060]

Maybe in your courtrooms.  I remember the one time in Judge McBryde's court where there was something right out of "My Cousin Vinny."  Plaintiff of Nigerian descent was testifying and the Judge kept asking him to repeat himself because he couldn't understand him through his thick accent.  Finally, the judge asks, "what is your native language?", to which he replies, "English."  Not to be outdone, he then followed up with the classic, "where are you from?".  

[DixonHur 10806]

nm

Edited August 17, 2018 by DixonHur
Damn you DDD Dad!

[Mojo Hand 4580]

So is this fucker getting off or what?