General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsYet more bad news for Manafort and Gates.
A judge has ordered their attorney to provide testimony about them, under a crime fraud exception to the normal rules about attorney-client privilege.
https://lawnewz.com/uncategorized/grand-jury-docs-have-been-unsealed-and-its-looking-even-worse-for-manafort/
The trial hasnt even started yet, and already, things are going badly for Paul Manafort and Rick Gates. An October 2 Memorandum Opinion was unsealed yesterday, in which D.C. District Court Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell decided to compel grand jury testimony from a lawyer representing Manafort and Gates under the crime-fraud exception to attorney-client privilege. The Special Counsels Office (referred to as SCO throughout the document) sought to compel the testimony of Manafort and Gates lawyer (referred to as the Witness). Now we know that the grand jury proceedings culminated in indictments, and Judge Howells ruling on the this motion to compel testimony is more than a little foreshadowing. The Courts opinion on this issue allows us to peek into the generally secret grand jury proceedings, and that peek isnt looking so good for the defendants.
SNIP
However, privileges are not absolute; among other exceptions is the crime-fraud exception to attorney-client privilege. Under this exception when a privileged relationship is used to further a crime, fraud, or other misconduct, the lawyer doesnt get to use that relationship as a shield. The concept is easy, but getting a court to agree to use the exception is pretty challenging. In this case, Muellers office would have had to prove that the lawyer in question made the communication with the intent to further an unlawful or fraudulent act, and that Manafort and Gates actually carried out the crime or fraud. In other words, the judge at the grand jury proceeding found that there was plenty of evidence that Manafort and Gates had committed crime or fraud. Sure, for purposes of compelling a witness to testify at the grand jury phase, theres no requirement that the crime or fraud is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and the evidentiary rules are different than theyll be at trial. But bottom line, a federal judge looked at the evidence available to her and found that the SCO had made a good case for guilt against Manafort and Gates. Not a good start for the former Trump advisers.
At this point, we dont know exactly upon which evidence the court relied; however, we do know that at least some of that evidence hasnt yet been seen by the defendants. The courts Memorandum explained that the court had approved the use of in camera, ex parte proceedings to determine the propriety of a grand jury subpoena or the existence of a crime-fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege.After those in camera (privately, with the judge), ex parte proceedings (outside the presence of Manafort, Gates, and their counsel), Judge Howell specifically found:
witness testimony and documentary evidence to show that these statements are false, contain half-truths, or are misleading by omission
SNIP
This is getting deep
Hornedfrog1985
(118 posts)What!?
I womder if thats why gates didnt have a lawyer!? He couldnt work for him maybe anymore?
Also, remember how rachel showed money was unaccounted for of the 75 million the other day? I wonder if they left it our, to bait them into this situation or something... ?
Wellstone ruled
(34,661 posts)Ambulance Chaser is in deep shit with the Court. Thursday's Hearing is going to get real interesting. Looks like a Mafia hearing.
unblock
(52,253 posts)"How can I get away with this"
Or
"How can I launder money"
lindysalsagal
(20,692 posts)MaryMagdaline
(6,855 posts)Didn't go to prison because their lawyers told them if they didn't report their father they were aiding and abetting an ongoing crime. Is the ongoing crime here the continual concealment of money owed in taxes or continuing to conceal money belonging to ongoing criminal enterprises run by Russians?
Our country so badly needed Mueller. He is fearless.
Stallion
(6,476 posts)nm
Hornedfrog1985
(118 posts)Even if trump pays for your lawyers, were coming for you. Mueller is like the boogie man.
mercuryblues
(14,532 posts)Not only that it would be highly unethical for him to pay lawyers for the people who are witnesses to your crime.
Irish_Dem
(47,131 posts)I hope I never cross this man.
central scrutinizer
(11,652 posts)I wonder how many layers of lawyers we will get.
fierywoman
(7,686 posts)other misconduct, the lawyer doesnt get to use that relationship as a shield," : would what the Trump lawyer did re Ivanka and (I think) Don Jr's Soho deal, where the lawyer passed along a (something like $30,000) campaign contribution to the NY DA (who then dropped the case) fall under this circumstance?
pnwmom
(108,980 posts)fierywoman
(7,686 posts)(and, I live in Redmond.)
Princess Turandot
(4,787 posts)The lawyer, who is not named in the document, initially made representations to the Justice Department about the pair's work for a Ukrainian political party that the government proved to the judge were false, the filing said. The judge's ruling compelled her to explain to the grand jury where she got the false information. The details are blacked out in the document.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/manafort-gates-pose-serious-risk-flight-says-mueller-n816246
Oops.
pnwmom
(108,980 posts)Achilleaze
(15,543 posts)And no loyalty to the USA.
SCVDem
(5,103 posts)Why are we even discussing this while we are at war?
At war removes the restraints on execution.
Remember, the repubs love war.