manafort guilty or not?

T

tsuke

New member
Looks like both defense and prosecution has rested.

for my 2 cents. Now that this has gone to the jury i think manafort will walk. Its almost impossible for a case like this not to be decided on partisan lines and there are going to be some trump supporters among the 12.
 
tsuke said:
Looks like both defense and prosecution has rested.

for my 2 cents. Now that this has gone to the jury i think manafort will walk. Its almost impossible for a case like this not to be decided on partisan lines and there are going to be some trump supporters among the 12.
Click to expand...

This caught my eye:

The defence rested its case after more than two hours of closed-door proceedings.

Mr Ellis did not provide an explanation as to why he chose to bar media from that portion of the trial, but noted a transcript would be available after the case concludes.

Kevin Downing, one of Mr Manafort’s lawyers, told journalists they rested their case without any witness testimony "because [Mr Manafort] and his legal team believe that the government has not met its burden of proof".

However, just the day before Mr Ellis dismissed a motion by the defence to dismiss the case based on those grounds.

He said the defence made a “significant” argument in claiming Mr Manafort could not have defrauded the Federal Savings Bank...
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/paul-manafort-trial-former-trump-225418727.html
Click to expand...
The judge's opinion on this case was obvious.
The defense rests after a 2 hr. meeting with the judge and prosecutors, not calling any witnesses.
The FBI interviewed Manafort back in what , 2013, about all this and they bring it to trial in 2018?
It kinda makes me wonder how strong the case was against Manafort. I thought it was supposed to be a slam dunk for the prosecution.
 
tsuke said:
Looks like both defense and prosecution has rested.

for my 2 cents. Now that this has gone to the jury i think manafort will walk. Its almost impossible for a case like this not to be decided on partisan lines and there are going to be some trump supporters among the 12.
Click to expand...

I say 40% chance of guilty, 50% hung jury to be retried, 10% chance of acquittal.

If judge Ellis had not put his thumb on the scale, conviction would be more likely.
 
anonymoose said:
This caught my eye:


The judge's opinion on this case was obvious.
The defense rests after a 2 hr. meeting with the judge and prosecutors, not calling any witnesses.
The FBI interviewed Manafort back in what , 2013, about all this and they bring it to trial in 2018?
It kinda makes me wonder how strong the case was against Manafort. I thought it was supposed to be a slam dunk for the prosecution.
Click to expand...

I think Manafort was left alone so long precisely because the case against him wasn’t so strong.
 
tsuke said:
Looks like both defense and prosecution has rested.

for my 2 cents. Now that this has gone to the jury i think manafort will walk. Its almost impossible for a case like this not to be decided on partisan lines and there are going to be some trump supporters among the 12.
Click to expand...

It does not really matter.....Mueller was defeated when he assumed Manafort would flip information his was if he squeezed him hard enough. Regardless....Manafort has balls in telling Mueller to piss off.....just like Judge Ellis did when he saw right through this dog and phony show. Mueller could care less if Manafort walks at this point.
 
Phantasmal said:
Have you seen the evidence in this trial?
Click to expand...

The 2005 evidence? The defense rested for a reason without saying a word. Kind'a makes one think there's a statute of limitations thing going on with some of these old charges.....even though Mueller attempted to suspend the statues. Dollars to a doughnut he has done something unconstitutional. Manafort is smiling like the cat that ate the canary for some reason.
 
Last edited:
I didn’t see the evidence, I truly can not predict how this will go. If the paper trail is strong, then he will be convicted, but charges of conspiracy are harder to prove, so my guess is he will skate on that one.
 
Darth Omar said:
Just what’s been reported.

My opinion was based on the fact they didn’t decide to charge Manafort for years after his alleged crimes. Why do you think that is?
Click to expand...
I don’t know, they have been watching him for awhile, maybe pieces started to fit together. Manafort isn’t the only criminal that charges come years after their initial crimes.
 
It's always a big roll of the dice for a defense to rest without presentation. They seem to feel very confident that the prosecution has not made their case. We'll see.
 
Phantasmal said:
I don’t know, they have been watching him for awhile, maybe pieces started to fit together. Manafort isn’t the only criminal that charges come years after their initial crimes.
Click to expand...

The most plausible explanation is the case against Manafort wasn’t that strong—if it was, they would have gotten him earlier.

The wildcard are his political connections. If he was associated with the right powerful people they may have left him alone on that basis—even if they had a good case against him.

You know, the Swamp thing.
 
Manafort had no defense and the prosecution had 3 damning witnesses and tons of paperwork. He is up on a dozen charges and I don't see him getting off on many of them. Manafort is likely going to jail for a long time This jury will be done quickly. The time will be taken up addressing so many charges.
 
Nordberg said:
Manafort had no defense .
Click to expand...
Then why bother to go to trial? Why not just plead guilty?
Maybe he and his lawyers didn't feel like he even needed one.

Remember,
just the day before Mr Ellis dismissed a motion by the defence to dismiss the case based on those grounds.

He said the defence made a “significant” argument in claiming Mr Manafort could not have defrauded the Federal Savings Bank...
Click to expand...
...but the judge said it's up to the jury to decide. Can't find the link to that.
 
The evidence of Manafort’s guilt is overwhelmingly strong, but the judge was helping the defence and a jury can be a wild card in any trial.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top