Aren’t prosecutors supposed to provide motivation? Isn’t a lavish lifestyle one motivation for trying to make a lot of money illegally, especially when the defendant has already made a ton of money legally?
3 Likes
Judge, can we use the term “Trump Care” and “Trump University” in the same sentence ?
Everyone needs to take a breath. This district is noted for its quick adjudication of cases. Keeping the introduction of evidence limited to relevant information is one way to cut down on trial time. The documents show what Manafort spent money on, where the money came from and that he didn’t pay tax on that money. It would appear that Manafort’s lawyers aren’t even contesting those facts, but want to claim Manafort knew nothing about it. I understand how showing pictures would be entertaining, but it really is of no value in terms of advancing the case. It’s not a big deal.
2 Likes
I’ll check in on this circus when the jury is ready to declare its verdict. Out.
1 Like
but repetition locks in the idea, especially when one is written, the other graphic
3 Likes
Not much choice but to wait and see what happens, so OK.
“Wow, Kathy! Look! Someone just sent us another key to some gigantic house. How did that happen? And Rick just deposited a ton of money in a bank account in my name. I wonder what he’s up to.”
2 Likes
This doesn’t seem like a big deal. The government is getting in what it needs to get it.
For example, the prosecutor wasn’t allowed to show pictures of the suits, but was able to show that Manafort spent nearly a million dollars at one clothing store. Probably the same thing will happen with the rugs.
That’s enough for the jury to see that he spent vastly more than he declared in his tax returns and that he paid from unusual foreign accounts.
1 Like
Trust me. Before this is over, the jury will be well acquainted with Manafort’s spending habits and will have access to all the documents showing it when they go into deliberation.
1 Like
This is kind of ridiculous. You prove unreported income by showing that the defendant spent more than can be accounted for by what they did report. I’m not sure what’s going to be left of the prosecution case if it can’t show that. You’re left with a bunch of bank transfers in and out that you don’t have any context for, and that means Manafort probably walks.
Judge Ellis: “nope. His Ric Flair lifestyle is a private matter between him and Equifax.”
1 Like
N DOJ will run it back.
I feel for Ellis though, because God almighty, he is literally asking for it.
Spending it is necessary to laundering it. Landscaping, home renovations, rugs, watches, jewelry. Things that hold value.
4 Likes
FTW
1 Like
What part of ill-gotten gains does this judge not understand?
This judge is starting to sound like he’s not being impartial at all. He’s telling the prosecutors how to present their case, what words they can use, and trying to neuter their case in its most important aspects, it seems.
Am I reading this wrong?
2 Likes
“Mr. Manafort is not on trial for having a lavish lifestyle,” Ellis chastised.
Aiya! I can understand this Rocket Docket judge saying “you made your point”, but he completely misses the point. Part of hiding money is to overly buy a huge bunch of shit that even rich people do not normally buy in short time periods. I pray prosecutors educated him (without rolling their eyes).
3 Likes