Manafort defense will call no witnesses (even Manafort)

[g5000]

By the way. Nobody balances checkbooks any more.

Well, maybe the occasional senior citizen here and there.

 

[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.

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.

True. Murder is relatively easy for just about anyone to grasp. The Byzantine intricacies of money and the esoteric laws regarding it? Not so much.

The defense declines to present a case in basically two circumstances, neither of which is "the prosecution has a slam dunk!": Either they have good reason to think the prosecution hasn't proven its case, or they're utterly incompetent. And I'm pretty sure they're not incompetent.

 

[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

As my uncle used to say, 'There's many a slip between a cup and a lip'. That basically means don't count your 'landslide victory' before they happen.



IMJO, Either Manafort is resigned to accepting his punishment, he is confident he may win, his team already has plans for an appeal, or he believes the President will pardon him...

If he was resigned to his punishment, he'd be looking for a plea bargain. In the case of either "planning for appeal" or expecting a pardon, one would expect his lawyer to be exerting at least a bit of effort to lay groundwork for whichever it is.

I guess we'll see with closing arguments.

 

[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.

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.

True. Murder is relatively easy for just about anyone to grasp. The Byzantine intricacies of money and the esoteric laws regarding it? Not so much.

And yet Al Capone was convicted of tax evasion.

Maybe bank and tax fraud is way above YOUR head, but don't project that onto others, sweetie.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Ex-Trump aide Paul Manafort faces trial in September

Manafort is facing two separate indictments on an array of charges, including conspiracy to launder money, filing false tax returns and failing to register as a foreign agent for lobbying work for the pro-Kremlin Ukrainian government of former President Viktor Yanukovych.



Manafort is never getting out of the woods.

Even if he gets a pardon , there’s all kinds of state laws he’s broken . I’m sure New York would love to take a shot at him.

Out of curiosity, what state laws do you think Manafort has broken? I'd be fascinated to see if you can even name them coherently.

 

[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.

True. Murder is relatively easy for just about anyone to grasp. The Byzantine intricacies of money and the esoteric laws regarding it? Not so much.

And yet Al Capone was convicted of tax evasion.

Maybe bank and tax fraud is way above YOUR head, but don't project that onto others, sweetie.

Again, have you ever sat on a white collar crime jury?

tax evasion is easy to prove, as in tax court the burden is on THE PERSON to prove they paid their taxes.

 

[g5000]

Ex-Trump aide Paul Manafort faces trial in September

Manafort is facing two separate indictments on an array of charges, including conspiracy to launder money, filing false tax returns and failing to register as a foreign agent for lobbying work for the pro-Kremlin Ukrainian government of former President Viktor Yanukovych.



Manafort is never getting out of the woods.

Even if he gets a pardon , there’s all kinds of state laws he’s broken . I’m sure New York would love to take a shot at him.

Out of curiosity, what state laws do you think Manafort has broken? I'd be fascinated to see if you can even name them coherently.

What part of "conspiracy to launder money" evades your comprehension?

 

[g5000]

How a Federal Inquiry Says Paul Manafort Laundered $18 Million, and How He Spent It

It has pictures! And charts! And diagrams!

Even a Trump voter can understand it!

Well, maybe not. It is longer than a tweet, after all...

"tl/dr, I'll just call it fake news lol."




.

 

[Mr.Blonde]

How a Federal Inquiry Says Paul Manafort Laundered $18 Million, and How He Spent It

It has pictures! And charts! And diagrams!

Even a Trump voter can understand it!

Well, maybe not. It is longer than a tweet, after all...


"tl/dr, I'll just call it fake news."

And no one cared until Mueller thought he could get Manafort to lie about Trump

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.

True. Murder is relatively easy for just about anyone to grasp. The Byzantine intricacies of money and the esoteric laws regarding it? Not so much.

And yet Al Capone was convicted of tax evasion.

Maybe bank and tax fraud is way above YOUR head, but don't project that onto others, sweetie.

Again, have you ever sat on a white collar crime jury?

tax evasion is easy to prove, as in tax court the burden is on THE PERSON to prove they paid their taxes.

Boy howdy, you want some mind-numbingly boring, esoteric legal arguments, Tax Court is like a double dose of surgical anesthesia dressed up in black robes.

 

[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.

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.

True. Murder is relatively easy for just about anyone to grasp. The Byzantine intricacies of money and the esoteric laws regarding it? Not so much.

And yet Al Capone was convicted of tax evasion.

Maybe bank and tax fraud is way above YOUR head, but don't project that onto others, sweetie.

We aren't talking about 2 sets of books. We are talking about more sophisticated crimes.


That no one cares about

 

[g5000]

Keep dreaming, rubes.

Meanwhile, out in reality, Manafort is going down.

 

[mudwhistle]

Ex-Trump aide Paul Manafort faces trial in September

Manafort is facing two separate indictments on an array of charges, including conspiracy to launder money, filing false tax returns and failing to register as a foreign agent for lobbying work for the pro-Kremlin Ukrainian government of former President Viktor Yanukovych.



Manafort is never getting out of the woods.

Even if he gets a pardon , there’s all kinds of state laws he’s broken . I’m sure New York would love to take a shot at him.

This trial is the State of NY doing Mueller’s job.

 

[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

As my uncle used to say, 'There's many a slip between a cup and a lip'. That basically means don't count your 'landslide victory' before they happen.



IMJO, Either Manafort is resigned to accepting his punishment, he is confident he may win, his team already has plans for an appeal, or he believes the President will pardon him...

If he was resigned to his punishment, he'd be looking for a plea bargain. In the case of either "planning for appeal" or expecting a pardon, one would expect his lawyer to be exerting at least a bit of effort to lay groundwork for whichever it is.

I guess we'll see with closing arguments.

If the prosecution and the defense have both rested their cases, we're left with onli closing arguments. A plea deal would have already been made by now. If he's found guilty plea deals go completely out the window.
Something tells me you're hoping Manafort flips.

 

[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

As my uncle used to say, 'There's many a slip between a cup and a lip'. That basically means don't count your 'landslide victory' before they happen.



IMJO, Either Manafort is resigned to accepting his punishment, he is confident he may win, his team already has plans for an appeal, or he believes the President will pardon him...

If he was resigned to his punishment, he'd be looking for a plea bargain. In the case of either "planning for appeal" or expecting a pardon, one would expect his lawyer to be exerting at least a bit of effort to lay groundwork for whichever it is.

I guess we'll see with closing arguments.

If the prosecution and the defense have both rested their cases, we're left with onli closing arguments. A plea deal would have already been made by now. If he's found guilty plea deals go completely out the window.
Something tells me you're hoping Manafort flips.

I could not personally be more indifferent either way. I'm keeping apprised of the main headlines in the case more as a matter of being aware of current events than because I give a rat's ass what happens to Manafort.

My understanding is that, until such time as a verdict is actually rendered, he has the option of changing his plea. So if he was really "resigned to his punishment", he would do that.

My inclination is to think that the defense attorney believes enough reasonable doubt already exists without him needing to create more, or alternatively, he believes that saying any more would hurt more than it would help.

 

[Dragonlady]

Not surprised by the move. Or the lack of the judges outright dismissal. There is a question of fact for the jury. Namely is gates telling the truth? Or is he lying.

Looks like reasonable doubt to me but who knows what the jury thinks. We may find out in a few hours

You seem to think that this entire case hinges on Gates’ testimony. Do you that without Gates, the state has nothing? If you do, you’re dreaming in technicolor.

The Prosrcution considered not even putting Gates on the stand, because they really didn’t need him to prove their case. The bank account records, tax returns and mortgage loan applications were the proof.

There is no “reasonable doubt” in this case. The case was so air tight, Manafort tried to strong arm witnesses. That just lead to more charges.

Can Manafort wear his ostrich jacket in prison? I’m sure the boys in the shower will love it.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

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

So far hasn't done anything... he's still an innocent man.

 

[edward37]

Not surprised by the move. Or the lack of the judges outright dismissal. There is a question of fact for the jury. Namely is gates telling the truth? Or is he lying.

Looks like reasonable doubt to me but who knows what the jury thinks. We may find out in a few hours

You seem to think that this entire case hinges on Gates’ testimony. Do you that without Gates, the state has nothing? If you do, you’re dreaming in technicolor.

The Prosrcution considered not even putting Gates on the stand, because they really didn’t need him to prove their case. The bank account records, tax returns and mortgage loan applications were the proof.

There is no “reasonable doubt” in this case. The case was so air tight, Manafort tried to strong arm witnesses. That just lead to more charges.

Can Manafort wear his ostrich jacket in prison? I’m sure the boys in the shower will love it.

And I'd love trump jr to be his cell mate

 

[g5000]

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

So far hasn't done anything... he's still an innocent man.

Locker up! Locker up! Locker up!

 

[edward37]

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

So far hasn't done anything... he's still an innocent man.

And so was Nixon ,,,,until republicans grew some nads