Judge in Manfort case threatened?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/08/17/judge-in-manafort-trial-says-hes-been-threatened-over-case.html
The judge in ex-Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort’s fraud trial revealed Friday he has received threats over the case and now travels with U.S. Marshals, as he turned back a media request to release juror information.

U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III, in rejecting the motion, argued that he’s confident the jurors would be threatened as well if their information were to be made public.

“I can tell you there have been [threats]. … I don’t feel right if I release their names,” he said, adding that because of threats against him, “The Marshals go where I go.”

The startling revelation came as the jury deliberated for its second day.

Ellis, a famously prickly judge known for his colorful comments, has attracted considerable attention during the Manafort trial for his frequent sparring with the attorneys – particularly those on Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team.

Earlier Friday morning, Ellis acknowledged facing pushback about how he’s handled this case. He told attorneys “I’m no stranger to criticism,” but said “this case has brought it to a new level.”

The juror motion itself was filed by multiple news organizations – the Washington Post, New York Times, AP, CNN, NBC, Politico and BuzzFeed. They sought to unseal records in the case, including information about the jurors.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/08/08/manafort-trial-mueller-gates-ellis-768715
Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort.

But it has been surprisingly hard going at times, and as they prepare to rest their case by the week’s end, they bear battle wounds that Manafort’s lawyers are sure to exploit as they mount their defense.

Even as Mueller’s team methodically piled up evidence of Manafort’s alleged tax and bank fraud, jurors have seen the special counsel’s case hit some potholes.

Most notably, Manafort’s attorneys have painted the prosecution’s star witness, Rick Gates, as a serial liar, embezzler and philanderer who — as a defense lawyer asserted in court on Wednesday — engaged in four extramarital affairs.

Several other setbacks have come courtesy of the cantankerous presiding federal judge, T.S. Ellis III.

The 78-year-old Ronald Reagan appointee has repeatedly tweaked Mueller’s team, on everything from the logic of their assertions to a prosecutor’s informality in answering a question with a “yeah” instead of “yes.” He has hurried along their case and blocked them from introducing some evidence of Manafort’s lavish lifestyle.

Taken on their own, the individual rebukes are relatively minor. But some legal experts say that, cumulatively, they could plant doubt in the mind of jurors about the strength of the prosecution’s case. Renato Mariotti, a prominent former federal prosecutor, tweeted Wednesday that Ellis has made “improper statements that have hurt the prosecution.”

The most reliable politics newsletter.
Sign up for POLITICO Playbook and get the latest news, every morning — in your inbox.

Email
Your email…
Sign Up
By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time.

“[T]he judge’s condescending attitude [could give] the jury the impression that the prosecution’s case is dubious,” added Philip Lacovara, a former U.S. deputy solicitor general. “This is an especially severe risk when the core of the case is the testimony of a co-conspirator who is admittedly a thief, liar, and embezzler. When the standard of proof is ‘beyond a reasonable doubt,’ there is no margin for error.”

Mueller’s team even filed a formal written protest on Thursday about the judge’s behavior, complaining that prosecutors were being unfairly called out in front of the jury.

The jury and not Ellis will decide Manafort’s fate. But the rulings and commentary of a seasoned judge are sure to have influence over jurors.

In what must have been a particularly unwelcome exchange for Mueller’s team, Ellis on Tuesday tweaked Gates, who admitted to embezzling expense money while working for Manafort.

Probably threatened by a donkey wearing an elephant suit!

Who doesn’t get death threats? Smart to keep the names of the jurors sealed, but they will leak out somewhere eventually.

LOL, true!

Apparently a Juror requested a definition of “Reasonable Doubt”.
I’ll take that under consideration and guess this wont turn out as well for Donkey’s in Elephant Suits as they might have liked.

Judge T.S. Ellis III, who reconvened court to answer the questions orally for the 12-member jury shortly after 5 p.m., said the government is not required to prove the defendant’s guilt beyond all possible doubt — only doubt based on reason.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/402248-manafort-jury-ends-first-day-with-questions-including-definition-of

They aren’t allow to take notes and required to rely on their own memory of testimony, shit I would have tuned them out after a few hours, actually maybe minutes.

The jury also asked asked Ellis if the indictment could be amended to show which pieces of evidence go with which charges. Ellis said no, the jury would have to rely on their own memory of the testimony.

Regarding post #6, sounds like this is heading toward an acquittal, and if not there will be plenty of basis for an appeal.

I read one of the jury’s questions regarding FBAR requirements. I prepare FBAR’s for clients and have done so for over a decade. Their question doesn’t have a black-and-white answer that I know of. For those who know the question, I think what’s described would constitute “other authority” therefore triggering the requirement, but from what little I’ve heard of the facts it isn’t crystal clear, and that means… reasonable doubt.

The only way I’d be able to stay awake is to take copious notes. Something that complex and you are supposed to keep it all juggled up in your head?

Three days ago the MSM said this one was in the bag and the experts said he’d be convicted quickly…

Now I’m liking this new alternative universe… if they a deliberating this long it sure is sound more like an acquittal. I really don’t give a damn whether Manifort is guilty or not. I just want to see that fallout of him being found not guilty. Everything was charged with barely moves my give a shit meter.

The complexity of the charges doesn’t make me think that the time taken so far is indicative one way or the other. The ‘reasonable doubt’ question is the most interesting, and the fact that they will have to work out the complexities of financial crimes and the evidence from memory would make me want to throw my hands up and say that ‘reasonable’ isn’t a high bar to reach.

I’m sure CNN thought that the jurors would be faster. That they want to delve into the jurors lives now- only when they are getting nervous - I think says a lot. I’ve always heard that the acquittal rate for federal crimes and especially white-collar crimes is really low. The question is if the jury hangs -what then? This is already really the second bite at the apple after he was investigated soon after the events. Trump I think could step in at that time and say that he isn’t going to make someone spend on a defense yet again- and there is another trial anyways.

From your post I believe you are a lawyer, please explain to this oldMan the Judges statement “only doubt based on reason.” What the frig does that mean? !!

I am a lawyer, I don’t do any trial work. Do you have a copy of exactly what the judge said? I hadn’t read about an issue on defining reasonableness.

On a different note, I can’t fathom why the jurors were not allowed to take notes, or how a juror who is not already an expert on these areas would be capable of making an intelligent decision without, at the absolute minimum, copious notes.

I’ve been working with the FBAR for 15+ years and if I was asked by a client anything that was not completely obvious, I would first refer back to the written form and its written instructions. It’s impractical to memorize every last word and comma in tax forms* when the answer matters, and many forms are changed every 1-2 years. Why would someone be forced to rely on memory when a potential life sentence is at stake?

*strictly speaking the FBAR is not a tax form and is not enforced by the IRS, but it is similar to tax forms and generally prepared by the same people in the same work process as actual tax forms.

F(U)BAR