COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL Here's a discussion on how Mueller could use this against Trump

[Wwcd]

Interesting. Some say it can be useful & some say no.
I am trying to understand how/if it would work

Just posting this for anyone wanting to dig further into it.
Thanks!

Here's the Viewpoint

Link to tweet

Here's the opposing viewpoint

Link to tweet

Here's the Twitter Link to the discussion:
https://mobile.twitter.com/PuestoLoco/status/1021434274153664512

[marylandblue]

1. The opposing view is correct, you can't use collateral estoppel to convict Trump

For example, in the Teapot Dome scandal, Interior Secretary Albert Fall was convicted of accepting a bribe from Edward Doheny, but Doheny was acquitted of paying the bribe. Different juries, different determinations of fact.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. The original tweet is incorrect.

Collateral estoppel (issue preclusion) and the related doctrine of res judicata (claim preclusion) can't be used offensively in a second action against a non-party to the first action unless that non-party was in privity with a party to that action. "Privity" exists only when the first action provided substantial protection of the rights and interests of the non-party - when the nonparty had notice and opportunity to be heard, and his interests were adequately protected by an actual party or representative in the first action.

So, if there are facts adduced at Manafort's trial establishing that he conspired with Trump regarding Russian interference with the election, those facts could be used against Trump at a subsequent trial only if Trump's interests were adequately represented at Manafort's trial, and I really don't see how that could or would happen.