General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSomething is off about the Manafort deliberations....
The jury for the Zimmerman case acquitted him after a mere 16 hours of deliberation. That was after 3 weeks of testimony. I would assume this case is less complicated than a murder case (yes I know there are thousands of documents, but the jury isn't reading every one of them). Not getting a good feeling about this. Seems like one or more are hung and wont convict. That's just my prediction unfortunately.
madaboutharry
(40,212 posts)I think we would already know there was a problem. The jury by this point would have been sending notes to the Judge that they were having a problem and the Judge would have already been encouraging them to keep trying.
I think it is just that they have a lot of documents to go through. Remember that the Judge didn't let the defense actually read them during the trial and said the jury can read them during deliberations. There are 390 documents.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,112 posts)some future trial that might lessen his control over this country.
Surely all future juries that hear cases that are connected in anyway to rump must be sequestered.
And thankfully I dont have to worry about people saying my comment is crazy, CT, etc. if we learned one thing by now it is that this CAN happen and WILL if possible.
I so want to be wrong, that he hasnt yet tainted this jury. That he will try is a no brainer.
KCDebbie
(664 posts)when they leave the court in the evening... How do we KNOW someone isn't threatening them at home or threatening their families?
Just because we don't know the names pf the jurrors doesn't mean someone else doesn't know their names...
Tucker08087
(621 posts)Judges do not settle for the first, We give up note, and there hasnt even been one yet.
Im guessing (pure speculation) that there are a few charges that they are hashing out. That is the difficulty with this case. There are many charges, and they must deliberate each one.
fallout87
(819 posts)Just frustrated is all. I can't believe they are STILL deliberating on this POS.
RockRaven
(14,972 posts)and both of those would contribute to a longer deliberation if the jury was committed to being thorough and deliberate (no pun intended).
But also they could be hung on any number of charges, whether it be one or 18.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,002 posts)donkeypoofed
(2,187 posts)Your worry is understandable, but I really think the verdict will come in this week and that there's too much documenting paperwork for him to be found not guilty. I don't even believe it will be a hung jury either. We just have to wait unfortunately. Hurry up, jury!!
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)Like ostrich coat and $1.5 million worth of suits.
But he did send it all to the jury, charging them to review it.
If they are acting as conscientious jurors, they are reviewing the most damning evidence now!
It'll take a couple days.
former9thward
(32,016 posts)The jury is not allowed to see anything not entered into evidence during the trial.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)Laura Appleman
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
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.
former9thward
(32,016 posts)That says nothing about what the jury is seeing or what I said.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)The jury even asked for an index of where all the evidence belongs related to the charges, and the judge told them to figure it out, the courtroom trial portion of the case (the judge and lawyers) is over.
Like I said.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/08/16/jury-deliberating-evidence-paul-manafort-fraud-tax-evasion-trial-trump/1007356002/
iamateacher
(1,089 posts)The judge made the jurors review the evidence on their own.
hlthe2b
(102,283 posts)in full before the jury. They were given the documents/exhibits however.
See my post #18
spooky3
(34,456 posts)documents is likely contributing to the time now needed by the jury to review them.
hlthe2b
(102,283 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Gotta hand it to ya... digging in on stuff like this certainly illustrates the full breadth of relevant knowledge you often allege.
pnwmom
(108,980 posts)He considered it a waste of time to show some of the items in court.
spooky3
(34,456 posts)when they asked if they could be provided a table showing which exhibit(s) were relevant to which charge(s). That meant they not only had to read the documents, they also had to sort them and possibly to argue over ambiguities about what goes with what.
This has been reported by multiple commentators on MSNBC.
Raven123
(4,844 posts)To review the evidence despite the obstacles placed by the judge
spooky3
(34,456 posts)sarcasmo
(23,968 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(49,002 posts)Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)Zimmermans case hinged on a few key things, if the jury believed X he would be found guilty if they believed Y he would be acquitted.
This case involves 18 different charges, all very technical and complicated ones.
You are confusing charges being SERIOUS with charges being COMPLICATED. The two do not always go hand in hand.
sarah FAILIN
(2,857 posts)I read he told them when they asked for clarification to rely on their own memory.
I am on pins and needles myself.
former9thward
(32,016 posts)He said the same thing any judge in the U.S. would have said.
sarah FAILIN
(2,857 posts)Maybe they will figure it out on their own.
former9thward
(32,016 posts)pnwmom
(108,980 posts)but to refuse to give the lawyers time during the trial to show the evidence to the jury. To expect the jurors to sort through it themselves, during deliberations. But that's what Judge thumb-on-the-scale did.
former9thward
(32,016 posts)pnwmom
(108,980 posts)You clearly haven't been following it closely.
Renew Deal
(81,860 posts)What you said isnt factual.
sarah FAILIN
(2,857 posts)Please don't accuse someone of not being honest when you don't seem to have investigated yourself.
[link:http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-paul-manafort-fraud-trial-20180816-story.html|
Renew Deal
(81,860 posts)I screwed that one up. Sorry
sarah FAILIN
(2,857 posts)pnwmom
(108,980 posts)pnwmom
(108,980 posts)due to time concerns. He said the jurors could see them during deliberations. That isn't standard.
Post #18 explains this in detail.
former9thward
(32,016 posts)However I will match my posts with the facts against yours any day.
pnwmom
(108,980 posts)This is a free discussion board.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)they don't all have to be placed as "exhibits" in open court...
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Sneederbunk
(14,291 posts)octoberlib
(14,971 posts)complex. So complex that a lot of prosecutors don't like to mess with them. The jury has 18 charges to go through and a mountain of paperwork.
BannonsLiver
(16,387 posts)Zimmerman to Manafort is not apples to apples as comparisons go. Not even remotely related in any way.
Crutchez_CuiBono
(7,725 posts)they want a taste for themselves after they see how easy it is. Hope im wrong,but, the reds have been able to corrupt a presidency, half of congress and the senate. This damn jury better do justice or three of 3 branches of govt have been corrupted by the russians.
flyingfysh
(1,990 posts)Everyone understands what murder is. In this case, there are technicalities in tax law that have to be explained. Most people don't know enough tax law to immediately start deciding a case. There are also the bank fraud charges, which are proven by showing the relevant documents. Murder is much simpler. I would not be surprised to see them take two weeks on this.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Making decisions based on serious charges set forth by the state. I dont care if it takes a week. Seems a number of the charges are cut and dry. Some not so. Those not sos often consume a lot of time in deliberations.
hlthe2b
(102,283 posts)the trial, allowed the prosecutors to introduce more than 400 documents and exhibits, BUT (and this is a big BUT), he did not allow them to "publish" them--meaning they were largely not individually discussed during the trial. That's why the jury sent out a question/request last week that the exhibits/documents be "catalogued" to the charges.. something the judge denied as it would put him in a position of "adding to the prosecutor's case" to do so.
So, that means if the jury is taking all 18 charges seriously, they are having to look at all those documents and try to make sense of them, something that in longer trials, the prosecutors would have done for them.
SO, no. I am not yet prepared to believe the jury is headed towards deadlock, though of course there is always a worry. And it certainly doesn't argue toward likely acquittal
wishstar
(5,269 posts)and there would be more interruptions in their deliberations, but it seems that judge answered their questions last week and they have gotten to work without having to ask any more questions.
News reporters on the scene do not seem concerned or aware of any unusual problems so that seems to be a good sign for prosecution. Reporters explained that there are lots of incriminating paper documents that were not presented to jurors previously so they are having to go over the additional paperwork from prosecution.
pnwmom
(108,980 posts)many of which were not presented to the jury in court, but they were expected to sift through during deliberations. And the specific items of evidence weren't linked to the 18 counts that were charged -- that was the job of the jury.
So I've read lawyers saying this wasn't taking so long for this kind of case, and some even predicting it could even go to mid-week.
kentuck
(111,098 posts)Try and persuade him/her that it is not about Donald Trump?
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,719 posts)And in fact it's extremely complicated, and a conscientious jury actually will read the documents no matter how many there are. They've been instructed to evaluate eighteen difference charges and determine how the testimony and documentary evidence relates to each charge. And because there are eighteen different charges based on different evidence it is beyond unlikely that they won't be able to reach a verdict on ANY of them. Hung juries are actually very rare. They are seen mostly on TV cop shows.
sprinkleeninow
(20,249 posts)💙🇺🇸🌊
elleng
(130,948 posts)Want to make trouble, make foolish assertions.
aeromanKC
(3,322 posts)If they bought the Defense argument and can get to Reasonable doubt, then they can zip through all indictments. It's gonna be Hung or Guilty. If Hung, hopefully in retrial the Prosecution will annotate the evidence documents with each indictment.
EllieBC
(3,014 posts)And there are some murder trials where deliberations stretch on for days on end and some are fast. Each case is unique.
honest.abe
(8,678 posts)However, the fact they extended today suggests to me they are nearing the end. Could be trying to wrap it up tomorrow.
dawg day
(7,947 posts)They just have to decide, "The prosecution didn't prove this beyond a reasonable doubt."
(Or perhaps, in the case of Zimmerman, "Hey, the kid was wearing a hoodie! What do you expect?"
To find someone guilty, they have to be more deliberate. And there are 18 counts, and they have to decide on each one of them.
Agreed, there could be a hung jury on some counts, but if the same juror hangs each count, there will be a lot of suspicion about that.
And let's say I'm the juror who for whatever reason doesn't vote "guilty' on counts. At some point, the other jurors would probably suggest, "Come on, vote yes on one, at least, so that it's not so suspicious."
DeminPennswoods
(15,286 posts)bunch when they arrived at the courthouse today. That, the request for a birthday cake, leaving early so a juror could attend an event and today staying late to work indicates to me that the jury has "bonded" with each other, they are consciencous and therefore less likely there will be a hung jury on any of the charges.
Doodley
(9,092 posts)DeminPennswoods
(15,286 posts)One of the MSNBC legal commentators first said the request for the birthday cake would thrill prosecutors because it was a sign the jurors were getting along and bonding with each other.
Doodley
(9,092 posts)sprinkleeninow
(20,249 posts)So nice!
DeminPennswoods
(15,286 posts)for the compliment, positive reinforcement to do the right thing.
dsc
(52,162 posts)There are 30+ charges against Manifort, there was one charge for Zimmerman (admittedly there was more than one level of charge but one set of facts). Manifort's case is heavy on documents, while Zimmerman's was mostly testimony. I can easily see why the Manifort jury is taking a lot of time.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(49,002 posts)Early in the trial they asked for a cake in the jury room to celebrate the birthday of one of the jurors.
They are likely simply taking their "charge" (deliberations) seriously.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Catherine Vincent
(34,490 posts)I think in this trial he will be acquitted.
Doodley
(9,092 posts)Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)Jarqui
(10,126 posts)very different cases
There are 18 counts to consider. One of the problems the jury cited was no one had organized which evidence belonged to which counts.
I followed a bunch of the case. If he is acquitted, Trump/Putin bought the jury.
I suspect the difficulty is some charges are more difficult to conclude than others and that and the volume of paper evidence to go through is causing the delay
bpj62
(999 posts)I live in Fairfax County which is part of the part of the jury pool area for Eastern District Court of the United States. A friend of mine was picked for jury duty on the Manafort Trial but was excused because he is a school teacher. He said the jury pool was a true representation of this area.
With that said this is a paper intensive trial that takes time to go through. They also are reviewing evidence that was admitted evidence but wasn't shown because the judge said it was overkill. He didnt exclude it, he just told the prosecution to keep it in the evidence room. Lastly this theory that the jury is somehow tainted is just that, a theory. Most people take jury duty seriously because they understand the gravity of the situation. We have no idea who the jurors are and I highly doubt that Putin does either. We will have a verdict by Thursday or Friday at the latest.
DeminPennswoods
(15,286 posts)TPM has a story up today about Manafort's financial straights. It gives one a clue about the evidence and complexity the jury is sorting through. https://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/a-new-fuller-picture-of-manaforts-financial-perils-as-he-joined-trump-camp
Personally, imho, the judge has made a mistake not giving the jurors an index of what documents relate to what charges. It might be different had he allowed the prosecutors to present the evidence in court, but he just told the jurors they could see it later for themselves.
Trueblue Texan
(2,430 posts)...for the jury to sort through in the Manafort trial. I'm not worried.
Bo
(1,080 posts)Pardoned in less than 60 seconds
Raine
(30,540 posts)we were in the deliberation room for three days. I'm sure the lawyers thought we were having a battle over the verdict but we each took turns reading the notes out loud that we had been allowed to take turning the trial. It took us three days to read them. At the end of the third day we voted once and reached a verdict. No arguing, no fighting, all civil, vedict quickly reached. You just don't know unless you're in there, don't jump to conclusions.
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)it takes time to sort thru and discuss. There are charges where a verdict was mostly likely reach in the first or 2nd vote and then as the charges involved more complicated issues and heaps more of evidence, more time is taken. Any one who expected a verdict in a day or 2 is greatly mistaken. This is showing the jury is taking serious deliberations on the charges and I doubt its going to end well for Manafort at all.