Manafort defense will call no witnesses (even Manafort)

[Ted Frazier]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

 

[edward37]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

How many years do you think he'll get and will Trump jr be his neighbor?

 

[depotoo]

Show us the charges against Trump, Jr.

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

How many years do you think he'll get and will Trump jr be his neighbor?

 

[martybegan]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Or they may argue the prosecution did not meet it's burden of proof and ask for summary dismissal.

 

[edward37]

Show us the charges against Trump, Jr.

Show us the charges against Trump, Jr.

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

How many years do you think he'll get and will Trump jr be his neighbor?

post: 20577402, member: 61249"]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

How many years do you think he'll get and will Trump jr be his neighbor?

[/QUOTE]
Oh they'll be coming Be patient He's a lying swine like his father

 

[Mr.Blonde]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Or they may argue the prosecution did not meet it's burden of proof and ask for summary dismissal.

There are two things that the defense is probably banking on. Either acquittal or the judge throwing out the case as you said or him throwing out the conviction.

At that point will Mueller bother to retry.

 

[edward37]

Show us the charges against Trump, Jr.

Show us the charges against Trump, Jr.

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

How many years do you think he'll get and will Trump jr be his neighbor?

post: 20577402, member: 61249"]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

How many years do you think he'll get and will Trump jr be his neighbor?

Oh they'll be coming Be patient He's a lying swine like his father[/QUOTE]
Hey Depot Imagine if instead of trump Obama was President now Would republicans be throwing themselves off tops of buildings?

 

[g5000]

There simply is no defense for what Manafort did. He has been caught red-handed.

 

[g5000]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Or they may argue the prosecution did not meet it's burden of proof and ask for summary dismissal.

Defense rests in Paul Manafort trial - CNNPolitics

Judge denies request to throw out charges

 

[martybegan]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Or they may argue the prosecution did not meet it's burden of proof and ask for summary dismissal.

There are two things that the defense is probably banking on. Either acquittal or the judge throwing out the case as you said or him throwing out the conviction.

At that point will Mueller bother to retry.

The other possibility is the defense thinks they did enough damage to the case via cross examination.

What makes me lean towards this is that the MSM has largely been silent about the actual nuts and bolts of the case and the testimony.

Although this could be because testimony in white collar crimes is boring as hell and often confusing to non-accountants.

 

[edward37]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Or they may argue the prosecution did not meet it's burden of proof and ask for summary dismissal.

My guess is 10 to 20 and a 10 million fine

 

[martybegan]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Or they may argue the prosecution did not meet it's burden of proof and ask for summary dismissal.

They would have done that the moment the prosecution rested.

Then they may think they did a good enough job during cross examination.

 

[mudwhistle]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Usually when the defense has torn the prosecutions case a new asshole they often don't need a defense. No lawyer worth his salt will rest his case if he feels he hasn't proven his case.

 

[martybegan]

There simply is no defense for what Manafort did. He has been caught red-handed.

Empty statement from an Empty TDS poster.

 

[Timmy]

Manafort is a shady character and everyone knows it. They couldn’t even line up witnesseses to speak on how he’s a good guy. Lol.

 

[Dragonlady]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Or they may argue the prosecution did not meet it's burden of proof and ask for summary dismissal.

There are two things that the defense is probably banking on. Either acquittal or the judge throwing out the case as you said or him throwing out the conviction.

At that point will Mueller bother to retry.

There is far too much evidence to dismiss this case, and the judge will never issue a summary dismissal in a big public jury trial like this. And there's also the second trial and the witness tampering charges if he did.

Manafort is guilty. He knows it and so do his lawyers. He's counting on a pardon.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

This is so very chancy. The defense is saying that the prosecution never proved the elements of the crime charged.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Or they may argue the prosecution did not meet it's burden of proof and ask for summary dismissal.

What people who watch too many bad movies and TV shows (like Ted) tend to forget is that the accused doesn't have to prove himself innocent; the prosecution must prove him guilty . . . beyond a reasonable doubt. To that end, if they feel that hasn't happened, they're much better off just making THAT case, and keeping their mouths shut otherwise, to avoid giving the prosecution anything to dig at.

And except in extreme cases, the defense lawyer is a damned fool if he allows his client anywhere near the witness stand.

 

[martybegan]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Or they may argue the prosecution did not meet it's burden of proof and ask for summary dismissal.

There are two things that the defense is probably banking on. Either acquittal or the judge throwing out the case as you said or him throwing out the conviction.

At that point will Mueller bother to retry.

There is far too much evidence to dismiss this case, and the judge will never issue a summary dismissal in a big public jury trial like this. And there's also the second trial and the witness tampering charges if he did.

Manafort is guilty. He knows it and so do his lawyers. He's counting on a pardon.

have you ever sat on a jury in a white collar crime case? Proving what happened is much harder than who did it, (which is what you usually deal with in things like murder and robbery).

You have to prove 1) something happened and 2) what happened was illegal.

 

[martybegan]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Or they may argue the prosecution did not meet it's burden of proof and ask for summary dismissal.

What people who watch too many bad movies and TV shows (like Ted) tend to forget is that the accused doesn't have to prove himself innocent; the prosecution must prove him guilty . . . beyond a reasonable doubt. To that end, if they feel that hasn't happened, they're much better off just making THAT case, and keeping their mouths shut otherwise, to avoid giving the prosecution anything to dig at.

And except in extreme cases, the defense lawyer is a damned fool if he allows his client anywhere near the witness stand.

In their closing argument they will hammer across the point that the prosecution has to prove 1) something happened and 2) what happened was illegal.

Far easier to prove murder than white collar crime.