HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Something is off about th...

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:30 PM

 

Something is off about the Manafort deliberations....

The jury for the Zimmerman case acquitted him after a mere 16 hours of deliberation. That was after 3 weeks of testimony. I would assume this case is less complicated than a murder case (yes I know there are thousands of documents, but the jury isn't reading every one of them). Not getting a good feeling about this. Seems like one or more are hung and wont convict. That's just my prediction unfortunately.

80 replies, 7618 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 80 replies Author Time Post
Reply Something is off about the Manafort deliberations.... (Original post)
fallout87 Aug 2018 OP
madaboutharry Aug 2018 #1
Eliot Rosewater Aug 2018 #19
KCDebbie Aug 2018 #69
Tucker08087 Aug 2018 #53
fallout87 Aug 2018 #68
RockRaven Aug 2018 #2
Bernardo de La Paz Aug 2018 #3
donkeypoofed Aug 2018 #4
yallerdawg Aug 2018 #5
former9thward Aug 2018 #14
yallerdawg Aug 2018 #22
former9thward Aug 2018 #28
yallerdawg Aug 2018 #38
iamateacher Aug 2018 #56
hlthe2b Aug 2018 #45
spooky3 Aug 2018 #50
hlthe2b Aug 2018 #51
LanternWaste Aug 2018 #80
pnwmom Aug 2018 #24
spooky3 Aug 2018 #32
Raven123 Aug 2018 #37
spooky3 Aug 2018 #40
sarcasmo Aug 2018 #6
Bernardo de La Paz Aug 2018 #7
Lee-Lee Aug 2018 #8
sarah FAILIN Aug 2018 #9
former9thward Aug 2018 #16
sarah FAILIN Aug 2018 #21
former9thward Aug 2018 #25
pnwmom Aug 2018 #41
former9thward Aug 2018 #61
pnwmom Aug 2018 #66
Renew Deal Aug 2018 #26
sarah FAILIN Aug 2018 #36
Renew Deal Aug 2018 #78
sarah FAILIN Aug 2018 #79
pnwmom Aug 2018 #42
pnwmom Aug 2018 #29
former9thward Aug 2018 #31
pnwmom Aug 2018 #48
AncientGeezer Aug 2018 #47
jberryhill Aug 2018 #10
Sneederbunk Aug 2018 #11
octoberlib Aug 2018 #12
BannonsLiver Aug 2018 #44
Crutchez_CuiBono Aug 2018 #13
flyingfysh Aug 2018 #15
Hoyt Aug 2018 #57
NCTraveler Aug 2018 #17
hlthe2b Aug 2018 #18
wishstar Aug 2018 #20
pnwmom Aug 2018 #23
kentuck Aug 2018 #27
The Velveteen Ocelot Aug 2018 #30
sprinkleeninow Aug 2018 #71
elleng Aug 2018 #33
aeromanKC Aug 2018 #34
EllieBC Aug 2018 #35
honest.abe Aug 2018 #39
dawg day Aug 2018 #43
DeminPennswoods Aug 2018 #46
Doodley Aug 2018 #63
DeminPennswoods Aug 2018 #67
Doodley Aug 2018 #70
sprinkleeninow Aug 2018 #72
DeminPennswoods Aug 2018 #75
dsc Aug 2018 #49
Hoyt Aug 2018 #59
Bernardo de La Paz Aug 2018 #52
PoliticAverse Aug 2018 #54
Catherine Vincent Aug 2018 #55
Doodley Aug 2018 #64
Puzzledtraveller Aug 2018 #58
Jarqui Aug 2018 #60
bpj62 Aug 2018 #62
DeminPennswoods Aug 2018 #76
Trueblue Texan Aug 2018 #65
Bo Aug 2018 #73
Raine Aug 2018 #74
beachbum bob Aug 2018 #77

Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:33 PM

1. If the jury was moving toward a deadlock,

I think we would already know there was a problem. The jury by this point would have been sending notes to the Judge that they were having a problem and the Judge would have already been encouraging them to keep trying.

I think it is just that they have a lot of documents to go through. Remember that the Judge didn't let the defense actually read them during the trial and said the jury can read them during deliberations. There are 390 documents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madaboutharry (Reply #1)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:53 PM

19. Or Putin got to somebody's family. And if he didnt do it THIS time, he will do it on

some future trial that might lessen his control over this country.

Surely all future juries that hear cases that are connected in anyway to rump must be sequestered.

And thankfully I dont have to worry about people saying my comment is crazy, CT, etc. if we learned one thing by now it is that this CAN happen and WILL if possible.

I so want to be wrong, that he hasnt yet tainted this jury. That he will try is a no brainer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Reply #19)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 11:03 PM

69. I agree! We don't know what the hell is going on at these jurors' homes

 

when they leave the court in the evening... How do we KNOW someone isn't threatening them at home or threatening their families?

Just because we don't know the names pf the jurrors doesn't mean someone else doesn't know their names...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madaboutharry (Reply #1)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 09:33 PM

53. This is true.

Judges do not settle for the first, “We give up” note, and there hasn’t even been one yet.
I’m guessing (pure speculation) that there are a few charges that they are hashing out. That is the difficulty with this case. There are many charges, and they must deliberate each one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madaboutharry (Reply #1)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 10:45 PM

68. I sure hope so. And you are probably right

 

Just frustrated is all. I can't believe they are STILL deliberating on this POS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:35 PM

2. This case has a) a lot more documents and b) more individual charges

and both of those would contribute to a longer deliberation if the jury was committed to being thorough and deliberate (no pun intended).

But also they could be hung on any number of charges, whether it be one or 18.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:35 PM

3. Assumption is the mother of all (foul)ups. Your assumption is false. . . . nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:35 PM

4. It's probably just because there are SO MANY charges to discuss and go over

Your worry is understandable, but I really think the verdict will come in this week and that there's too much documenting paperwork for him to be found not guilty. I don't even believe it will be a hung jury either. We just have to wait unfortunately. Hurry up, jury!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:36 PM

5. The judge didn't allow a lot of evidentiary documentation in the courtroom.

Like ostrich coat and $1.5 million worth of suits.

But he did send it all to the jury, charging them to review it.

If they are acting as conscientious jurors, they are reviewing the most damning evidence now!

It'll take a couple days.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yallerdawg (Reply #5)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:49 PM

14. No he didn't.

The jury is not allowed to see anything not entered into evidence during the trial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #14)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:00 PM

22. You can read about the case, you know.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/8/19/17752532/paul-manafort-jury-decision-judge-ellis

Laura Appleman

First, I would note that two days of deliberations isn’t really that long. I think that the American public has an unrealistic expectation, from all the depictions of criminal justice we get in the media, particularly television and movies, that every criminal adjudication, no matter how complex, can be decided in a short period of time. With something like the Manafort trial, which involves 18 counts related to tax fraud, bank fraud, money laundering, failure to register as a foreign agent, and obstruction of justice, it is likely taking the jury some time just to sort through the counts alone — 18 charges are a lot to bring to trial, and the jury must decide guilt or innocence on all 18.

In addition, the charges against Manafort are extremely complex; fraud, money laundering, obstruction of justice all are complicated issues, even for experts. The jury must consider paper trails, international financial transactions, and reams of documents — this is not an open-and-shut case. Moreover, the jury pool is not comprised of experts in international finance, so it makes sense that the deliberations are a slow, painstaking process.

Seth Abramson

Because this is a “paper case” with a number of charges, complicated financial records, and a lay jury not selected for its understanding of international financial transactions, we would expect a medium-length to long deliberation process — at least a couple days — simply for the jurors to work through all the evidence and discuss each charge separately.

Quick verdicts are not generally associated with lengthy, document-heavy white-collar prosecutions. And if any or all of the jurors have a sense of the public interest in this case, they are likely to be even more careful and deliberative in their review of the evidence than usual.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yallerdawg (Reply #22)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:08 PM

28. So?

That says nothing about what the jury is seeing or what I said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #28)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:24 PM

38. The judge admitted evidence that was not reviewed in front of the jury.

The jury even asked for an index of where all the evidence belongs related to the charges, and the judge told them to figure it out, the courtroom trial portion of the case (the judge and lawyers) is over.

Like I said.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/08/16/jury-deliberating-evidence-paul-manafort-fraud-tax-evasion-trial-trump/1007356002/

A federal court jury failed to reach a verdict during the first day of deliberations in the financial fraud trial of Paul Manafort, and the panel recessed after submitting four questions to the judge overseeing the case.

The judge denied a fourth request that the panel be provided an amended exhibit list that corresponded directly with the 18 criminal counts filed in the case.

The judge said the panel would be moved to a larger space to accommodate the boxes of exhibits and evidence submitted by the government.

In addition to the nearly 400 government exhibits, personal notes taken by jurors throughout the trial and the testimony of 27 witnesses will go with the panel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yallerdawg (Reply #38)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 09:48 PM

56. This

The judge made the jurors review the evidence on their own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #28)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:49 PM

45. yellerdawg is right... Relatively little of the admitted documents were "published' (i.e., discussed

in full before the jury. They were given the documents/exhibits however.

See my post #18

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hlthe2b (Reply #45)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 09:29 PM

50. the attorney guest on Rachel just now reiterated how the failure to publish the

documents is likely contributing to the time now needed by the jury to review them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spooky3 (Reply #50)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 09:30 PM

51. Exactly...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #28)

Wed Aug 22, 2018, 10:59 AM

80. So you're taking the "I'm not a doctor, but I play one on TV" defense, eh?

Gotta hand it to ya... digging in on stuff like this certainly illustrates the full breadth of relevant knowledge you often allege.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #14)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:06 PM

24. They WERE entered into evidence but the judge said the jury could see some during deliberations.

He considered it a waste of time to show some of the items in court.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #24)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:13 PM

32. And, the jury WAS given a pile of documents and was told "no"

when they asked if they could be provided a table showing which exhibit(s) were relevant to which charge(s). That meant they not only had to read the documents, they also had to sort them and possibly to argue over ambiguities about what goes with what.

This has been reported by multiple commentators on MSNBC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spooky3 (Reply #32)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:22 PM

37. Good for them if they are taking their time

To review the evidence despite the obstacles placed by the judge

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raven123 (Reply #37)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:32 PM

40. agree nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:37 PM

6. 18 charges with a crazy # of documents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:38 PM

7. 17 charges and maybe 20 hours of deliberation. That's about 70 minutes per charge. . . . nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:40 PM

8. No, your totally wrong

 

Zimmerman’s case hinged on a few key things, if the jury believed X he would be found guilty if they believed Y he would be acquitted.

This case involves 18 different charges, all very technical and complicated ones.

You are confusing charges being SERIOUS with charges being COMPLICATED. The two do not always go hand in hand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:42 PM

9. The judge should have made sure every item of evidence was explained

I read he told them when they asked for clarification to rely on their own memory.


I am on pins and needles myself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarah FAILIN (Reply #9)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:50 PM

16. No, he should not have.

He said the same thing any judge in the U.S. would have said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #16)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:58 PM

21. So just let the jury wander about then?

Maybe they will figure it out on their own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarah FAILIN (Reply #21)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:06 PM

25. Yes. That is court procedure anywhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #25)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:33 PM

41. It is NOT courtroom procedure in most places to allow items to be put into evidence

but to refuse to give the lawyers time during the trial to show the evidence to the jury. To expect the jurors to sort through it themselves, during deliberations. But that's what Judge thumb-on-the-scale did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #41)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 09:59 PM

61. I would match my courtroom experience against yours any day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #61)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 10:42 PM

66. I would match my reading of the reports about this case against yours.

You clearly haven't been following it closely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarah FAILIN (Reply #21)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:07 PM

26. They asked about reasonable doubt and he said to look at the instructions

What you said isn’t factual.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #26)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:19 PM

36. What I said is factual.

Please don't accuse someone of not being honest when you don't seem to have investigated yourself.
Second, jurors asked if the judge could define "shelf company" and the filing requirements related to income. Witnesses testified at Manafort's trial that he used so-called shelf companies - companies previously created by a lawyer in Cyprus that could be used to control the bank accounts in question - in order to move Manafort's money. To that question, the judge said the jury would have to rely on their memory of the evidence presented at trial.

[link:http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-paul-manafort-fraud-trial-20180816-story.html|

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarah FAILIN (Reply #36)

Tue Aug 21, 2018, 11:17 AM

78. You're right

I screwed that one up. Sorry

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #78)

Tue Aug 21, 2018, 02:01 PM

79. No biggie

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #26)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:34 PM

42. That is just ONE of the things they asked about. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #16)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:08 PM

29. Not true. He allowed some items to be entered into evidence but not shown to the jury,

due to time concerns. He said the jurors could see them during deliberations. That isn't standard.

Post #18 explains this in detail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #29)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:13 PM

31. You like to comment on my posts no matter what the subject.

However I will match my posts with the facts against yours any day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #31)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 08:47 PM

48. If I see someone say something that isn't factually true, I might comment.

This is a free discussion board.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #29)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 08:03 PM

47. If it's stipulated as relavant by the Prosecution and Defence...

 

they don't all have to be placed as "exhibits" in open court...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:44 PM

10. Oh bullshit - not even comparable

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:46 PM

11. Not getting concerned until after tomorrow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:47 PM

12. This case is less complicated? Are you kidding me? White collar financial crimes are almost always

complex. So complex that a lot of prosecutors don't like to mess with them. The jury has 18 charges to go through and a mountain of paperwork.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Reply #12)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:41 PM

44. That's was my thought as well.

Zimmerman to Manafort is not apples to apples as comparisons go. Not even remotely related in any way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:49 PM

13. That's what happens when jurors judge graft and bribery adn tax evasion cases

they want a taste for themselves after they see how easy it is. Hope im wrong,but, the reds have been able to corrupt a presidency, half of congress and the senate. This damn jury better do justice or three of 3 branches of govt have been corrupted by the russians.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:50 PM

15. This case is more complicated than the Zimmerman case

Everyone understands what murder is. In this case, there are technicalities in tax law that have to be explained. Most people don't know enough tax law to immediately start deciding a case. There are also the bank fraud charges, which are proven by showing the relevant documents. Murder is much simpler. I would not be surprised to see them take two weeks on this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flyingfysh (Reply #15)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 09:54 PM

57. Basically agree, except the 6 jurors in Zman case didn't understand "murder" or lesser charges.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:51 PM

17. Fellow American citizens are...

 

Making decisions based on serious charges set forth by the state. I don’t care if it takes a week. Seems a number of the charges are cut and dry. Some not so. Those “not so’s” often consume a lot of time in deliberations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:52 PM

18. Manafort faces 18 counts in the VA trial... Equally important, the judge, in trying to expedite

the trial, allowed the prosecutors to introduce more than 400 documents and exhibits, BUT (and this is a big BUT), he did not allow them to "publish" them--meaning they were largely not individually discussed during the trial. That's why the jury sent out a question/request last week that the exhibits/documents be "catalogued" to the charges.. something the judge denied as it would put him in a position of "adding to the prosecutor's case" to do so.

So, that means if the jury is taking all 18 charges seriously, they are having to look at all those documents and try to make sense of them, something that in longer trials, the prosecutors would have done for them.


SO, no. I am not yet prepared to believe the jury is headed towards deadlock, though of course there is always a worry. And it certainly doesn't argue toward likely acquittal

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 06:55 PM

20. If there was a problem, jurors would be asking more questions of the judge

and there would be more interruptions in their deliberations, but it seems that judge answered their questions last week and they have gotten to work without having to ask any more questions.

News reporters on the scene do not seem concerned or aware of any unusual problems so that seems to be a good sign for prosecution. Reporters explained that there are lots of incriminating paper documents that were not presented to jurors previously so they are having to go over the additional paperwork from prosecution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:04 PM

23. The Zimmerman case didn't involve almost 400 financial documents,

many of which were not presented to the jury in court, but they were expected to sift through during deliberations. And the specific items of evidence weren't linked to the 18 counts that were charged -- that was the job of the jury.

So I've read lawyers saying this wasn't taking so long for this kind of case, and some even predicting it could even go to mid-week.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:08 PM

27. A member of the cult is sitting on the jury?

Try and persuade him/her that it is not about Donald Trump?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:09 PM

30. This is nothing like the Zimmerman case.

And in fact it's extremely complicated, and a conscientious jury actually will read the documents no matter how many there are. They've been instructed to evaluate eighteen difference charges and determine how the testimony and documentary evidence relates to each charge. And because there are eighteen different charges based on different evidence it is beyond unlikely that they won't be able to reach a verdict on ANY of them. Hung juries are actually very rare. They are seen mostly on TV cop shows.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #30)

Tue Aug 21, 2018, 12:33 AM

71. Pour vous:

😍
💙🇺🇸🌊


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:16 PM

33. Completely different kind of case.

Want to make trouble, make foolish assertions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:17 PM

34. Acquittal would be in already

If they bought the Defense argument and can get to Reasonable doubt, then they can zip through all indictments. It's gonna be Hung or Guilty. If Hung, hopefully in retrial the Prosecution will annotate the evidence documents with each indictment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:18 PM

35. What does this have in common with a murder trial?

And there are some murder trials where deliberations stretch on for days on end and some are fast. Each case is unique.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:32 PM

39. This case is more complicated than the Zimmerman. Lots of charges and documents.

However, the fact they extended today suggests to me they are nearing the end. Could be trying to wrap it up tomorrow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 07:41 PM

43. Acquittals often happen quickly

They just have to decide, "The prosecution didn't prove this beyond a reasonable doubt."
(Or perhaps, in the case of Zimmerman, "Hey, the kid was wearing a hoodie! What do you expect?"

To find someone guilty, they have to be more deliberate. And there are 18 counts, and they have to decide on each one of them.

Agreed, there could be a hung jury on some counts, but if the same juror hangs each count, there will be a lot of suspicion about that.

And let's say I'm the juror who for whatever reason doesn't vote "guilty' on counts. At some point, the other jurors would probably suggest, "Come on, vote yes on one, at least, so that it's not so suspicious."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg day (Reply #43)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 08:01 PM

46. The jurors were reported to be sitting in a tight

bunch when they arrived at the courthouse today. That, the request for a birthday cake, leaving early so a juror could attend an event and today staying late to work indicates to me that the jury has "bonded" with each other, they are consciencous and therefore less likely there will be a hung jury on any of the charges.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DeminPennswoods (Reply #46)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 10:23 PM

63. I love your powers of deduction and hope you are right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doodley (Reply #63)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 10:44 PM

67. Can't take credit

One of the MSNBC legal commentators first said the request for the birthday cake would thrill prosecutors because it was a sign the jurors were getting along and bonding with each other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DeminPennswoods (Reply #67)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 11:15 PM

70. After witnessing your honesty and modesty, I think even more highly of you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doodley (Reply #70)

Tue Aug 21, 2018, 12:35 AM

72. 😙

So nice!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doodley (Reply #70)

Tue Aug 21, 2018, 06:42 AM

75. Thanks

for the compliment, positive reinforcement to do the right thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 08:56 PM

49. This case is vastly more complicated than the Zimmerman case

There are 30+ charges against Manifort, there was one charge for Zimmerman (admittedly there was more than one level of charge but one set of facts). Manifort's case is heavy on documents, while Zimmerman's was mostly testimony. I can easily see why the Manifort jury is taking a lot of time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #49)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 09:57 PM

59. Basically agree, although Zman jury did manage to screw up a much "simpler" case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 09:33 PM

52. A key indicator is that the jury bonded together early.


Early in the trial they asked for a cake in the jury room to celebrate the birthday of one of the jurors.

They are likely simply taking their "charge" (deliberations) seriously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 09:39 PM

54. What's off is your understanding of this case and the number of charges. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 09:46 PM

55. I agree

I think in this trial he will be acquitted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Catherine Vincent (Reply #55)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 10:27 PM

64. That would be a devastating blow to the future of America.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 09:55 PM

58. they gonna let him skate I bet

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 09:57 PM

60. Apples and oranges comparison

very different cases

There are 18 counts to consider. One of the problems the jury cited was no one had organized which evidence belonged to which counts.

I followed a bunch of the case. If he is acquitted, Trump/Putin bought the jury.

I suspect the difficulty is some charges are more difficult to conclude than others and that and the volume of paper evidence to go through is causing the delay

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 10:20 PM

62. Smart Jury

I live in Fairfax County which is part of the part of the jury pool area for Eastern District Court of the United States. A friend of mine was picked for jury duty on the Manafort Trial but was excused because he is a school teacher. He said the jury pool was a true representation of this area.

With that said this is a paper intensive trial that takes time to go through. They also are reviewing evidence that was admitted evidence but wasn't shown because the judge said it was overkill. He didnt exclude it, he just told the prosecution to keep it in the evidence room. Lastly this theory that the jury is somehow tainted is just that, a theory. Most people take jury duty seriously because they understand the gravity of the situation. We have no idea who the jurors are and I highly doubt that Putin does either. We will have a verdict by Thursday or Friday at the latest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bpj62 (Reply #62)

Tue Aug 21, 2018, 07:09 AM

76. Good example of what the jurors are dealing with

TPM has a story up today about Manafort's financial straights. It gives one a clue about the evidence and complexity the jury is sorting through. https://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/a-new-fuller-picture-of-manaforts-financial-perils-as-he-joined-trump-camp

Personally, imho, the judge has made a mistake not giving the jurors an index of what documents relate to what charges. It might be different had he allowed the prosecutors to present the evidence in court, but he just told the jurors they could see it later for themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Mon Aug 20, 2018, 10:28 PM

65. There is a heck of a lot more documentary evidence...

...for the jury to sort through in the Manafort trial. I'm not worried.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Tue Aug 21, 2018, 12:58 AM

73. Manafort will be pardoned in Months

Pardoned in less than 60 seconds

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Tue Aug 21, 2018, 04:46 AM

74. I was on a jury, the trial lasted about 4 days

we were in the deliberation room for three days. I'm sure the lawyers thought we were having a battle over the verdict but we each took turns reading the notes out loud that we had been allowed to take turning the trial. It took us three days to read them. At the end of the third day we voted once and reached a verdict. No arguing, no fighting, all civil, vedict quickly reached. You just don't know unless you're in there, don't jump to conclusions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fallout87 (Original post)

Tue Aug 21, 2018, 07:34 AM

77. you clearly don't understand trials with multi counts AND financial crimes

 

it takes time to sort thru and discuss. There are charges where a verdict was mostly likely reach in the first or 2nd vote and then as the charges involved more complicated issues and heaps more of evidence, more time is taken. Any one who expected a verdict in a day or 2 is greatly mistaken. This is showing the jury is taking serious deliberations on the charges and I doubt its going to end well for Manafort at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread