drcrinum said:

---

---

A juror wants to change their lunch order?

blindey said:

---

At this point, I'm at a total loss. I would have guessed hold-out (one way or another) and they would have come back hung. But it doesn't sound like they've told the judge they are at an impasse or deliberations have stalled. It seems more like they're looking at the record in real detail to try and get it right. Maybe guilty on the tax charges?

---

Trying to break the last holdout with conflicts in the minutiae.

Speaking of doing a bad job of indexing evidence for the jury, did Mueller's motley band of prosecutors just forget that FRE 1006 exists?

This is a financial crimes prosecution. The materials are voluminous and dense. Sounds like they went with a strategy of trying to make the jury hate the defendant instead of working through the dense, painful details and it didn't work.

blindey said:

---

Speaking of doing a bad job of indexing evidence for the jury, did Mueller's motley band of prosecutors just forget that FRE 1006 exists?

This is a financial crimes prosecution. The materials are voluminous and dense. Sounds like they went with a strategy of trying to make the jury hate the defendant instead of working through the dense, painful details and it didn't work.

---

Actually, no they didn't completely forget. They had a chart used during their closing argument which was the summary but never moved to admit it as evidence. Ooops!

NM

24 to 72 hrs of deliberations repeatedly saying "Don't be stupid" enough to break 11 jurors to NOT GUILTY.

aggiehawg said:

---

Shamelessly stolen from tigerdroppings:

Quote:

---

From: Jury
To: Judge
Subject: Question

If we acquit, are we going to be murdered?

Love,
Jury

---

---

Stealing this for twitter trollings

aggiehawg said:

---

blindey said:

---

Speaking of doing a bad job of indexing evidence for the jury, did Mueller's motley band of prosecutors just forget that FRE 1006 exists?

This is a financial crimes prosecution. The materials are voluminous and dense. Sounds like they went with a strategy of trying to make the jury hate the defendant instead of working through the dense, painful details and it didn't work.

---

Actually, no they didn't completely forget. They had a chart used during their closing argument which was the summary but never moved to admit it as evidence. Ooops!

---

So wait....they waited until closing to show the chart to the jury? That many lawyers billing at a blended rate of -- what -- $700/hour (excluding AUSAs) couldn't figure out that they needed a witness to sponsor the chart so they could offer it?

And here I am grinding out billable hours on legitimate cases like a chump.

It could also mean what happens if they cannot reach a decision on even a single count.

Rapier108 said:

---

It could also mean what happens if they cannot reach a decision on even a single count.

---

They probably would have said "any" instead of "single".

FriscoKid said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

It could also mean what happens if they cannot reach a decision on even a single count.

---

They probably would have said "any" instead of "single".

---

True. At first blush that sounds bad for the defense. However, Ellis did not tell the jury that a partial verdict is a possibility, yet. He sent them back to reach an unanimous verdict. If they cannot, then he has informed counsel he will entertain a partial verdict. (Doocy reporting on FNC.)

But trying to parse a jury's use of words in a question is a mixed bag at best. They quite often manage to confuse themselves.

And I think Mueller over-charged that led to such confusion.

Herridge reported that when Judge Ellis told the jury to be respectful of other jurors' opinions and for each juror to reach their own reasoned conclusions, one juror that she described as a mid-30s male nodded his head several times. Could be a sign that he is one of the hold-outs but for which side remains the question.

SIAP:

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/21/former-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-exploring-possible-plea-deal.html

Quote:

---

President Donald Trump's former longtime personal lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen is in the process of discussing a potential guilty plea with prosecutors in New York, NBC News reported on Tuesday, citing sources familiar with the matter.

The sources told NBC News that no deal had yet been reached. Cohen is reportedly under investigation for a number of charges related to tax fraud and other banking-related crimes. Investigators are probing more than $20 million in loans obtained by taxi businesses owned by Cohen and his family, The New York Times reported on Sunday.

Any deal could have dramatic implications for the president, who has worked closely with Cohen for more than a decade. Trump has gone on the offensive against Cohen in recent weeks as Cohen began to signal that he could cooperate with investigators working for special counsel Robert Mueller.

---

Is Virginia one of those states where it is easy to get out of jury duty? If so, maybe the jury is comprised of folks that think $25/day and a free lunch is an awesome deal. They could be stringing this out to get a couple more free sub sandwiches.

Awan gets off for time served after pleading guilty for bank fraud.

Quote:

---

...In an email sent on Monday afternoon, Tawil denied that he is a foreign agent. He also said that his business arrangement with Papadopoulos fell apart because the former Trump aide acted "unprofessionally and unethically."

Tawil told TheDCNF that he is "sure the FBI have the means to know very well who [I am], and that I am not an foreign agent."

"I am a pro Trump citizen mainly because I correctly predicted that he would stand up against Chinese future hegemony," he said through email.

Tawil said that he "tried to help" Papadopoulos by bringing him in on a new consulting business he had created for the petroleum services industry.

"Unfortunately he very fast disappointed me and the potential first customer (a private company). He acted very unprofessionally and unethically. That was it," Tawil told TheDCNF....

---

'Tried to help' Papadopoulos??? Give me a break.

drcrinum said:

---

Quote:

---

...In an email sent on Monday afternoon, Tawil denied that he is a foreign agent. He also said that his business arrangement with Papadopoulos fell apart because the former Trump aide acted "unprofessionally and unethically."

Tawil told TheDCNF that he is "sure the FBI have the means to know very well who [I am], and that I am not an foreign agent."

"I am a pro Trump citizen mainly because I correctly predicted that he would stand up against Chinese future hegemony," he said through email.

Tawil said that he "tried to help" Papadopoulos by bringing him in on a new consulting business he had created for the petroleum services industry.

"Unfortunately he very fast disappointed me and the potential first customer (a private company). He acted very unprofessionally and unethically. That was it," Tawil told TheDCNF....

---

'Tried to help' Papadopoulos??? Give me a break.

---

Who pays someone $10,000 in cash before they even start to work for them? Some type of signing bonus?

Gonna throw the BS flag on that one.

VaultingChemist said:

---

Awan gets off for time served after pleading guilty for bank fraud.

---

That just stinks to high heavens.

If the question means they've reached a decision on 17 counts and are working on one, that doesn't mean 17 guilty or 17 not guilty. More likely there is a mix. The charges are 3 areas: tax fraud, foreign bank account declarations and bank fraud. Seems to me the guilty/not guilty will be consistent inside each area, but not necessarily the same as the other areas. The account registration could be different because of the 50% ownership rule. 17-1 either way doesn't make much sense to me. I'll be very surprised if it's not guilty on the tax charges.

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

---

Indeed.

I do have to wonder about the verdict form however. Must be pretty complicated to have them confused to that degree. Manafort's lawyers requested that a new form add a category for "Hung" to each count but Ellis denied that...for now.

Assuming Ellis at some point accepts a partial verdict, the counts upon which the jury hung could theoretically be retried. But if the jury is that confused by the verdict form, assessing which counts were hung might be complicated by their misuse of the form. They sometimes check the wrong boxes. Rare but it happens.

VegasAg86 said:

---

If the question means they've reached a decision on 17 counts and are working on one, that doesn't mean 17 guilty or 17 not guilty. More likely there is a mix. The charges are 3 areas: tax fraud, foreign bank account declarations and bank fraud. Seems to me the guilty/not guilty will be consistent inside each area, but not necessarily the same as the other areas. The account registration could be different because of the 50% ownership rule. 17-1 either way doesn't make much sense to me. I'll be very surprised if it's not guilty on the tax charges.

---

As I stated above, I think they are confused by the verdict form itself. If they are hung, is that a "not guilty" finding, seems to be their confusion. And that wouldn't be that unusual in a complex multi-count case. Juries often think the unanimous part applies to "guilty" and if it is not unanimous, that's automatically the default position of "not guilty."

This is becoming wild.

Quote:

---

Imran Awan, the former IT aide to congressional Democrats whose federal bank fraud case has drawn the interest of top Republicans, avoided jail time Tuesday after the defense complained about disparaging comments made against the defendant by President Trump and others.

During a hearing Tuesday in Washington, U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan sentenced Awan to three months of supervised release plus time served. Chutkan, who cited "unfounded allegations" against Awan, also did not impose a fine.

---

Trump said mean things about Awan, so Obama-appointed judge helped ease Awan's suffering.

GCP12 said:

---

---

Maybe they are waiting for the IG Report on FISA Abuse...or perhaps they want to keep running up the legal bills for Flynn...or possibly they want to keep Flynn quiet until after the Midterms.