Prosecution rests - Judge Ellis+Defense come up with -interesting- argument

[pdq]

From Law and Order, we find out what the long, secret bench discussion on Friday morning was all about - Judge Ellis teamed up with the defense to cook up an interesting defense to Manafort's bank fraud:

In summary, the judge and Team Manafort expressed concerns of the relevancy of [Bank President] Calk’s statements in the bank and tax fraud trial. The idea being that Manafort could not have defrauded the Federal Savings Bank since the bank CEO, Calk, knew Manafort’s “representations were false” and approved loans anyway.

Got that? Steve Calk saw Manafort as his chance at a quid-pro-quo cabinet-level job in the Trump administration, so even though the loan docs Manafort submitted were false, and the other bank management wanted to turn down the loan, Calk was going to do it anyway.

Yep, that's the defense's argument. Can't be fraud if my client was just trying to sell a job in the Trump swamp by taking the bank's money via a corrupt bank president.

:RollingEyesSmiley5:

Also, Ellis (yeah, the judge!) said that maybe Manafort didn't need to file reports on his many foreign shell companies, since he was not the majority owner (both Manafort and his wife each owned 50%, so neither was the "majority" owner.)

I. am. not. kidding.

Manafort's team will file to dismiss all charges tomorrow AM (as all defense lawyers do) and if Ellis isn't totally in the tank, then they'll present a defense, although at present it's hard to see how they can beat falsified documents with Manafort's signature and $16M in unreported income. Judge Ellis to the rescue?

[deckeda]

Manafort truly has a really good friend behind the bench.

The bank manger must have forced Manafort to supply fraudulent docs. Yeah, that's it.

Translation, "The defendant's not a crook, because the bank manager is. One can't be guilty if someone else is (of some other thing.)"

Logical fallacy, anyone?

[GGD]

Did Judge Ellis just receive a wire transfer from a foreign country?

[Speedy]

GGD wrote:
Did Judge Ellis just receive a wire transfer from a foreign country?

Soon.

There is still the second trial.

[pdq]

BTW, this came up today:

Prosecutor Greg Andres suggested that [90 minutes for closing arguments] might be too short, noting the judge had told him he could use his closing argument to refer to emails that had been introduced as evidence, but which jurors had not been shown in court [per Ellis]. The remark prompted an unusual exchange.

Ellis said he recalled telling the lawyers they should not send back to the jury room evidence that had not been discussed in court. Andres countered that Ellis had previously barred the prosecution from having Manafort’s emails read to the jury, but said prosecutors could address those in their closing arguments. Ellis said he indeed recalled that, though he thought he also said, “it doesn’t make sense to send exhibits back to the jury that have not been referred to” in court.

It does when they are material evidence which you, as judge, previously barred the jury from seeing/hearing:

In one February 2016 email, as Manafort is juggling bills, he asks Gates to sign a document for him and send it back “so I can send… as if it is my signature.” Later, he says, “I need you to sign the … docs with my signature and kathy’s. [An apparent reference to his wife] Pls look at previous signatures. The last time you did mine it was rejected.”

...Defense attorneys have suggested Manafort’s signature was forged on documents opening bank accounts in Cyprus.

If Manafort is convicted (which he will be) it will be despite Ellis's best efforts. His Republican credentials will be untarnished.

[deckeda]

Convoluted. How do you introduce evidence in closing but not send the jury back with that knowledge? How do you read emails and say it’s not evidence?

This judge is loony. As in, incompetent.

[pdq]

He is a little looney. Today he announced there would not be any written material when he gives his instructions to the jury, but he'll make a tape and they can listen to him again if they want to.

(Maybe more than a little looney.)

[pdq]

BTW, one more email introduced today:

Paul Manafort turned to Jared Kushner for help in an attempt to secure a Trump administration job for a Chicago banker at the center of Manafort’s fraud trial.

Manafort, Donald Trump’s campaign manager in 2016, got a quick response.

“On it!’’ Kushner replied on Nov. 30, 2016, according to an email submitted by prosecutors into evidence Monday at Manafort’s trial on bank and tax-fraud charges.

...and I thought Manafort was, like, a coffee boy who was only with the Trump campaign for a very short time. Somehow Jared knew him, I guess.

[deckeda]

I’m sure it was something as simple as both being introduced to each other in the Walmart checkout aisle. “Oh, you know the president-elect? I have a friend looking for odd jobs around town. Any openings there?”

“On it!”

[rjmacs]

Ellis plays fast and loose with everything other than his written opinions. Don't mistake his courtroom shenanigans for judicial malfeasance; he usually falls in line when it's time to write it up.