Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Something is off about the Manafort deliberations.... [View all]yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)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
Seth Abramson
Laura Appleman
First, I would note that two days of deliberations isnt 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.
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.
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.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
80 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Or Putin got to somebody's family. And if he didnt do it THIS time, he will do it on
Eliot Rosewater
Aug 2018
#19
Assumption is the mother of all (foul)ups. Your assumption is false. . . . nt
Bernardo de La Paz
Aug 2018
#3
It's probably just because there are SO MANY charges to discuss and go over
donkeypoofed
Aug 2018
#4
yellerdawg is right... Relatively little of the admitted documents were "published' (i.e., discussed
hlthe2b
Aug 2018
#45
the attorney guest on Rachel just now reiterated how the failure to publish the
spooky3
Aug 2018
#50
So you're taking the "I'm not a doctor, but I play one on TV" defense, eh?
LanternWaste
Aug 2018
#80
They WERE entered into evidence but the judge said the jury could see some during deliberations.
pnwmom
Aug 2018
#24
17 charges and maybe 20 hours of deliberation. That's about 70 minutes per charge. . . . nt
Bernardo de La Paz
Aug 2018
#7
It is NOT courtroom procedure in most places to allow items to be put into evidence
pnwmom
Aug 2018
#41
Not true. He allowed some items to be entered into evidence but not shown to the jury,
pnwmom
Aug 2018
#29
This case is less complicated? Are you kidding me? White collar financial crimes are almost always
octoberlib
Aug 2018
#12
That's what happens when jurors judge graft and bribery adn tax evasion cases
Crutchez_CuiBono
Aug 2018
#13
Basically agree, except the 6 jurors in Zman case didn't understand "murder" or lesser charges.
Hoyt
Aug 2018
#57
Manafort faces 18 counts in the VA trial... Equally important, the judge, in trying to expedite
hlthe2b
Aug 2018
#18
This case is more complicated than the Zimmerman. Lots of charges and documents.
honest.abe
Aug 2018
#39
What's off is your understanding of this case and the number of charges. n/t
PoliticAverse
Aug 2018
#54
you clearly don't understand trials with multi counts AND financial crimes
beachbum bob
Aug 2018
#77