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 General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Leghorn21

(13,524 posts)
Thu Jun 21, 2018, 10:07 PM Jun 2018

Help, DU lawyers! Manafort's request to suppress his storage unit stuff as evidence

was denied today.

But the judge also added this:



I don’t understand how this is different from holing up in his VIP suite at Northern Neck Regional Jail? Why did this need to be stated?

Thanks in advance for edification!

Document snip found via Bloomberg rptr:
https://mobile.twitter.com/davidjoachim/status/1009902925366353920

...whom I found via immaculate researcher SpicyFiles:
https://mobile.twitter.com/SpicyFiles/status/1009943483367469056
5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Help, DU lawyers! Manafort's request to suppress his storage unit stuff as evidence (Original Post) Leghorn21 Jun 2018 OP
K&R RandomAccess Jun 2018 #1
This is not my area of the law Gothmog Jun 2018 #2
Thanks, Gothmog - yes, it does seem to be REstating the terms of his original jail sentence Leghorn21 Jun 2018 #3
I'll Do My Best To Translate ChoppinBroccoli Jun 2018 #4
You can't comprehend the depth of my gratitude for your thoughtful, detailed explanation here, Leghorn21 Jun 2018 #5

Gothmog

(145,293 posts)
2. This is not my area of the law
Thu Jun 21, 2018, 10:35 PM
Jun 2018

It seems to be stating the terms that were disclosed earlier. I am understand that Manafort will be segregated from the general jail population

Leghorn21

(13,524 posts)
3. Thanks, Gothmog - yes, it does seem to be REstating the terms of his original jail sentence
Thu Jun 21, 2018, 10:51 PM
Jun 2018

- so it just seems strange this would be reiterated again today...hmmm...well, if I hear anything, I’ll be back!

ChoppinBroccoli

(3,784 posts)
4. I'll Do My Best To Translate
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 12:09 AM
Jun 2018

Item #1 says that Manafort is to be held in a facility separate from people who are AWAITING sentences (people who have been found guilty but who have not yet been sentenced), SERVING sentences (people who have already been found guilty and sentenced), or awaiting appeal (people who have been found guilty, have been sentenced, but who have appealed and are awaiting a decision on their appeal). Essentially, it means he's to be held with other people who are awaiting trial (which normally means they're being held in a county jail or other local lock-up). If I had to guess, I would say that the Judge is ordering that Manafort NOT be allowed to go off to some cushy, minimum security prison because he doesn't want his time behind bars to be too easy on him. I think he wants Manafort to be treated just like every other person charged with a crime and not given special treatment. Again, just a guess.

Item #2 just orders that he be allowed enough time to meet with his lawyer(s). I'm guessing either he or his lawyers raised a stink about the amount of time he's allowed to spend with them in order to prepare his defense. As a tactic to prevent him from being locked up, they probably argued that he wouldn't be able to spend enough time with them to adequately prepare his defense. The Judge likely ordered this concession as a compromise so he couldn't argue that he was denied any of his rights to consult with his attorneys or to aid in his own defense.

Item #3 is just the Judge making an order that allows Manafort to be transported to a hearing on another matter in another court. Again, his lawyers probably argued that his incarceration would prevent him from being able to defend himself in that other matter (whatever it is), so the Judge said, "Fine, I'll make an order allowing him to be released into the custody of the Marshalls to be transported to Court for his hearing." Again, I think this is the Judge's way of telling Manafort's lawyers, "I hear your arguments that he's going to be prejudiced by being locked up, but rather than let him stay on the outside, I'm going to make a bunch of orders protecting his rights."

So, to sum up, I think it's this Judge's way of compromising with Manafort's lawyers, who probably argued that locking him up would cause him to be prejudiced in all these ways. The Judge wasn't having any of it, so he locked him up, but did his best to protect his rights at the same time.

Leghorn21

(13,524 posts)
5. You can't comprehend the depth of my gratitude for your thoughtful, detailed explanation here,
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 12:22 AM
Jun 2018

Choppin!!!

Thanks so much for the time and effort you spent on this reply!!!!

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Help, DU lawyers! Manafor...