So what does that say about Ellis' treatment of Manafort?First, there can’t be a sentence without an investigation. After 9/11, the United States Department of Justice and the U.S. Attorney’s Offices that it controls shifted resources and focus from white-collar crime to drugs, guns, and immigration. [...] [C]omplex financial crimes—are time-consuming and resource-intensive. America picks who goes to jail when it picks whom to investigate—which is one of the reasons so few people involved in the 2008 Wall Street debacle went to jail.
Second, prosecutors have enormous power over who goes to jail and for how long. That power doesn’t just involve deciding who gets indicted. It involves deciding how he gets indicted. [...] Federal prosecutors can substantially shape a sentence by the plea deal they offer, choosing which parts of the sentencing guidelines apply. Prosecutors are more inclined to wield that power to benefit people like Manafort, not people charged with crimes involving drugs, blue-collar property crimes, and violence.
Third, Congress has given Ellis the power to give people like Manafort a break, but has denied him that power when the defendant is accused of many blue-collar crimes. Last year, Ellis sentenced a 37-year-old man named Frederick Turner to 40 years in federal prison for methamphetamine distribution. He had no choice: Congress passed laws making 40 years the mandatory minimum sentence.
[...]
Congress has passed mandatory minimum laws for drugs, guns, child abuse, and child porn. President Trump pushed for harsher mandatory minimum laws for immigration cases. [...] That judgment favors the rich at the expense of the poor.
Fourth, the U.S. sentencing guidelines treat some crimes more harshly than others, and though, unlike mandatory minimums, they are only recommendations, not strictures, they strongly influence judges. USA Today reported that fraud cases in Ellis’s district yielded an average sentence of 36 months, versus 66 months for firearms charges and 84 months for drug charges, all higher than the national average. Ellis announced that he was sentencing Manafort below the recommended guideline range because that range was far above what defendants received in similar cases. That is, in fact, a factor that he’s required by law to consider. [...] Judges give white-collar criminals lower sentences because white-collar criminals typically get lower sentences.
[...]
Fifth, money drives cases. Manafort’s criminal defense cost more than most defendants make in a lifetime. [...] An extremely experienced, qualified defense team with plenty of time makes a profound difference at every stage of a case. Even when rich people get convicted, money helps get them the best plea deals, the most persuasive sentencing presentations, and often the most lenient sentences.
Sixth, and finally, judges are human. Racism and bias of every sort play a role in the system, but it’s too simplistic to say the problem is that particular judges are racist. The problem is that judges give breaks to people with whom they can identify—people whose humanity they recognize.
Ken White
I wonder if there's no possibility of requesting a mistrial. Perhaps that has to be done before a jury verdict is handed down? Or maybe it's just not an option?The performance of U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis III in the trial of Paul Manafort on bank fraud and tax evasion charges has been decidedly unusual.
[...]
Ellis intervened regularly, and mainly against one side: the prosecution.
[...]
The judge continually interrupted the prosecution's questioning of witnesses, prompting lead prosecutor Greg Andres to pointedly note: "Your honor stops us and asks us to move on." Ellis pressed the prosecution to rush through testimony about important financial documents. He made critical comments about prosecution evidence and strategy — all in front of the jury.
[...]
After prosecutor Uzo Asonye questioned a bank employee about Manafort's failed attempt to obtain a $5.5 million construction loan on a Brooklyn brownstone, the judge — unprompted by a defense objection — declared: "You might want to spend time on a loan that was granted." The comment strongly implied to jurors that the prosecution was wasting their time. But an attempt to defraud was part of the conspiracy count in the indictment; false representation to secure a loan, successful or not, is itself a crime.
[...]
The judge's interruptions occurred in the presence of the jury and on matters of substance, not courtroom conduct. He disparaged the prosecution's evidence, misstated its legal theories, even implied that prosecutors had disobeyed his orders when they had not.
[...]
Ellis also questioned the relevance of Manafort's work as a political consultant for Russian-backed politicians in Ukraine, for which he was paid tens of millions of dollars from 2010 to 2014. But if Manafort didn't disclose some payments because he was not registered in the United States as a foreign agent, it would provide a motive to hide the amounts from the U.S. government — just what the trial was about. Ellis chided prosecutors for eliciting testimony about Manafort's lavish lifestyle, but that kind of testimony is also a classic element in a tax-evasion case. That your cars, boats, condos and clothing suggest you made much more income than you reported would surely be relevant.
[...]
Clearly worried about its outcome, prosecutors went so far as to urge Ellis to tell the jury, in his instructions before they began deliberating, not to let his commentary affect their decision-making. Ellis essentially did just that on Wednesday.
It may well have been too little too late.
[...]
Under the Code of Conduct for U.S. judges, a judge is supposed to be fair and impartial, as well as "patient, dignified, respectful and courteous" to those in his courtroom. The rule's concern is as much about the appearance of justice as its reality. If the judge violates that rule and a defendant is convicted, there may be a trial remedy — an appeal.
But there will be no appeal available to address Ellis's anti-prosecution bias if Manafort is acquitted by the jurors, who began deliberating on Thursday. The prohibition against double jeopardy precludes it.
WaPo
...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.Ellis had interjected Thursday during the questioning of a bank employee by prosecutor Uzo Asonye. The employee was discussing how Manafort attempted but failed to get a $5.5 million construction loan, according to Politico.
“You might want to spend time on a loan that was granted,” the judge said.
“Your honor, this is a charged count in the indictment,” Asonye responded.
“I know that,” Ellis said.
That exchange was addressed Friday in a court filing by prosecutors.
“The Court’s statement that the government ‘might want to spend time on a loan that was granted’ misrepresents the law regarding bank fraud conspiracy, improperly conveys the Court’s opinion of the facts, and is likely to confuse and mislead the jury,” prosecutors wrote.
The filing marked the second time that federal prosecutors have requested Ellis issue a corrective statement during the trial.
[...]
Ellis began the day by holding a bench conference with attorneys from both sides before the jury was called into the courtroom, and held a second conference before leaving the room “to consider an issue," according to Politico.
Multiple news outlets noted that the judge did not exit through the door toward his chambers, but instead through doors in the direction of the jury room.
Ellis returned about 45 minutes later, at which point he summoned the jury for attendance and said they would take an early lunch break
The Hill
If he wants the pace to pick up, maybe he could dispense with the humorous asides.Judge Ellis, 78, is the formidable ringmaster of the greatest show in the United States District Court in Alexandria, Va., demanding both precise questioning and a breakneck pace in the trial of Mr. Manafort, President Trump’s former campaign chairman.
He has routinely broken in on questioning, limited admission of evidence and exhorted lawyers to “expedite” — all the while entertaining spectators with humorous asides about his age, his wife, his Navy past, his lack of an email address, the jury’s lunch menu, split infinitives and the noise produced by a machine intended to keep bench conferences from being overheard (like “the sound of waves crashing”).
NYT
Judge Ellis is just an old asshole, isn't he?Mr. Manafort’s lawyers have stayed out of firing range so far, but their turn could come when the defense starts putting on its own witnesses. Judge Ellis has a reputation for being harder on the defense than on the prosecution.
Razor sharp minds don't have to be arrogant attention hounds.To his admirers, Judge Ellis’s bluntness and impatience are indicative of a razor-sharp mind. He has degrees from Princeton, Harvard and Oxford.
Did he know for a certainty that no juror had - or had a close relative or friend who had - made an attempted suicide by that method? I'm sure he didn't. Unbelievable thoughtlessness.[S]ome lawyers question whether he is so controlling that he unfairly restricts how both defenders and prosecutors can operate. He loves the law, some lawyers who have been before him say sardonically, almost as much as he loves himself.
[...]
Whatever criticism he has faced does not seem to have fazed Judge Ellis at all in his conduct of Mr. Manafort’s trial.
[...]
“I am a Caesar in my own Rome,” he said at one point, discussing why he refused to allow defendants to plead no contest instead of guilty. “It’s a pretty small Rome,” he added.
[...]
To the jurors, the judge could not be more solicitous, joking about the plain lunch menu (“You won’t find baked alaska”). At least the meal is free, he told the jurors on opening day, saying he hoped no one had a fleeting urge to “slit their wrists” because they had been unfortunate enough to be picked from the jury pool.
Doesn't seem like the type to care.He has clearly reveled in his captive audience. “My hearing is not what it once was,” he said last week, pausing for a beat with comic effect. “Nothing is what it once was.” Born in Bogotá, Colombia, he took the opportunity during a sentencing to display his fluency in Spanish, questioning the defendant himself while an interpreter stood by.
He religiously avoids mingling with lawyers from either side, even in social settings. Even United States attorneys are not allowed in his chambers.
[...]
Even if the spectators had come only for the Manafort case, he said, he was glad they got a chance to see the criminal justice system at work. He has weighed in on a variety of issues outside the courtroom, criticizing conditions at a Virginia prison and questioning whether sentencing laws are too harsh.
What an interesting observation.“Judges should be patient — they made a mistake when they confirmed me,” he said to Mr. Andres on Wednesday. “I’m not patient. So don’t try my patience.”
...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.“I’m never patient, but you must be,” Judge Ellis warned the prosecutor last week.
“No comment,” Mr. Andres said.
“That was a comment,” the judge said. “I have a long memory.”
Background.After being chastised repeatedly by U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis in front of the jury during Paul Manafort’s ongoing trial in Virginia, the prosecutors arguing the case appear to have had enough. On Thursday, they filed a court filing taking issue with Ellis’s outburst over a government witness who had watched the full trial before being called to the stand.
[...]
Asonye brought up the court filing to Ellis at the beginning of THursday’s proceedings. “You’re to put that aside,” Ellis told the jury about the issue. “I may well have been wrong.”
TPM
Ooooooh, the prosecution is getting bold.Last week, [Judge T.S. ] Ellis had reprimanded lawyers on both sides [in the Manafort trial] for rolling their eyes and requested that they "rein in their facial expressions."
[...]
After the jury was dismissed Monday evening, [...] Ellis scolded [prosecutor Greg] Andres for lowering his gaze and demanded that Andres look him in the eye when addressing him. Andres defended himself by saying he didn't want to reveal any facial expressions.
CNN
I bet that's right.Andres and Ellis also got into a debate about the relevance of asking certain questions about political work done in Ukraine. Ellis said he would point to the record to show that he rarely interrupted Andres' questions.
Andres, who clearly disagreed, replied, "I will stand by the record as well."
Ellis shot back, "You will lose."
Which sounds like a reminder of who's in charge here, to me, rather than a softening of mood.At the end of their heated exchange, though, the mood softened a bit. Andres told Ellis that he "didn't mean to be disrespectful," and Ellis assured him that he was "not worried at all."
Yeah, we can tell.Ellis reflected on the stress and pressure of high-profile cases and noted that he was just trying to "minimize the stress time."
Fox News judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano on Wednesday said Judge T.S. Ellis has shown “an extraordinary bias” against prosecutors in the criminal trial of former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort.
“I’m not happy with this judge,” Napolitano said on Fox News. “He’s making too much of the case about him and he’s showing an extraordinary bias against the government. If you feel that negatively about the government, you shouldn’t be on the case. Or you should keep those feelings to yourself, not manifest them.”
Throughout the trial, tensions have been evident between Ellis and prosecutors. On Tuesday, the judge suggested to a prosecutor that his eyes were welling with tears.
“I understand how frustrated you are,” Ellis said to Greg Andres. “In fact, there’s tears in your eyes right now.’’
Ellis has also criticized prosecutors for presenting too much evidence related to Manafort’s spending, pointing out it isn’t a crime to spend on luxuries.
He also told attorneys last week to stop using the term “oligarch.”
“Find another term to use,” he said, suggesting they instead refer to oligarchs as “people who financed the campaign.”
The Hill
I understand he's chastised the prosecutor for references to Manafort's lavish lifestyle, indicating that it's not a crime to be rich. Together with Trump's tweets, if the jury sees them, this apparent animosity could influence their decision.Judge T.S. Ellis III said that while he hasn’t seen it himself, he’s been told that lawyers on both sides have “rolled their eyes” after leaving bench conferences.
The implication, he said, is, “‘Why do we have to put up with this idiot judge?'”
“Don’t do that,” he told the lawyers. “It’s inappropriate.”
He said that if he had seen it himself, “I might be a little upset,” but that his eyes are not what they were 40, 50 or 60 years ago. Ellis is 78 years old.
“Rein in your facial expressions,” he concluded.
WaPo live-blogging
It's not?As the second day of Manafort's trial got underway Wednesday, U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis III indicated he was worried that referring to the businessmen who funded Manafort's political work in Ukraine as "oligarchs" had the tendency to suggest that the defendant was engaged in shady and unsavory work.
[...]
Prosecutors used the term repeatedly in opening statements Tuesday, saying that a number of Ukrainian oligarchs paid a total of more than $60 million to back Manafort's work in Ukraine on behalf of President Viktor Yanukovuch and his Party of Regions.
[...]
"We're not going to have a case tried that he associated with despicable people and, therefore, he's despicable," the judge declared during an exchange before jurors were brought into the courtroom. "That's not the American way."
Politico
As prosecutor Uzo Asonye was questioning an FBI agent about a 2013 document Gates wrote relating to several tax issues, the judge asked why the government was having the agent discuss the contents of the memo rather than questioning the apparent author when he takes the stand.
"You're going to offer Mr. Gates, aren't you?" Ellis asked, clearly trying to move the tedious questioning along.
"He may testify in this case, your honor, he may not," Asonye said.
The statement prompted more than a dozen reporters to leave their seats in the gallery and head for the door.
"That was news to me and, obviously about 27" others in the courtroom, the judge said to laughter from various quarters including some jury members.
Asonye quickly backpedaled, insisting he was simply observing that the prosecution constantly assesses its case to decide how to proceed.
"As the evidence comes in, we constantly evaluate whether or not" to call a witness, the prosecutor said. "That applies to every witness, not only Mr. Gates."
Ellis wasn't buying it. "The fact of the matter is you know who you are going to call," the judge shot back. "If you are going to call Mr. Gates, this is a waste of time."
[...]
Ellis limited prosecutors further during Rabin's appearance, balking at efforts to introduce three photos showing Manafort with Yanukovych. The judge agreed to allow only one into evidence, suggesting that he didn't want too much evidence showing how Manafort rubbed shoulders with the very powerful.
While the judge allowed one of the photos to be admitted, when Andres asked to actually show it to the jury, the judge said tersely: "No." So Andres moved on.
I read somewhere that they needed more time because they were new to the case. So, how many times can Manafort change attorneys and delay the trial?Five potential witnesses against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, including accountants and bankers, were identified Monday as the federal judge in the case granted the defense more time to review tens of thousands of documents handed over in recent weeks.
Bloomberg
From all indications, Judge Ellis is indeed in the theater business. He just doesn't want anyone else on stage with him.Among the possible witnesses granted immunity in the case are people from Kositzka, Wicks and Company, an accounting firm used by Manafort, and others who appear to have worked for the Federal Savings Bank in Chicago, which provided him with millions of dollars in mortgage loans.
[...]
They were James Brennan, Dennis Raico, Cindy Laporta, Donna Duggan and Conor O’Brien [accountants].
[...]
Two other names on the list match those who have worked at the Federal Savings Bank [presumably Jim Brennan and Dennis Raico].
[...]
Ellis said he would have potential jurors fill out written questionnaires on Tuesday in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia. Then he will bring them back on July 31 to question them before the lawyers agree on 12 jurors and four alternates. Ellis warned that he wouldn’t allow the trial to touch on areas that have “little to do with the guilt or innocence” of Manafort but are instead political theatrics.
“I’m not in the theater business,” Ellis said. “You have to be better looking for that.”
We'll be waiting.[Former Trump campaign chairman Paul] Manafort faces bank fraud and tax fraud charges related to his consulting work in the Ukraine for then-President Viktor Yanukovych and his pro-Russian Party of Regions. Manafort has pleaded not guilty to these charges and related charges in DC.
[...]
With the criminal trial [...] just two days away, the judge in the case ordered the testimony of five witnesses granted immunity by special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team.
U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis at a hearing Monday morning said he would unseal the documents that would reveal the identities of the immunized witnesses.
With the criminal trial of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort just two days away, the judge in the case ordered the testimony of five witnesses granted immunity by special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team. U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis at a hearing Monday morning said he would unseal the documents that would reveal the identities of the immunized witnesses.
TPM
Maybe Judge Ellis should look at the order creating the special prosecutor.[Paul Manafort's] trial in the case is set for July 10.
[...]
A federal judge sharply challenged Special Counsel Robert Mueller's prosecution team Friday, questioning how its indictment of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort on financial charges relates to Mueller's core mandate to investigate alleged 2106 Russian election interference.
U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis said Mueller's team seemed to be pursuing the case — which involves bank and tax fraud — in order to "tighten the screws" on Manafort, in the hope that he will testify against others including President Donald Trump.
"I don't see what relation this indictment has with what the special counsel is authorized to investigate," Ellis said during an hourlong hearing in Alexandria, Virginia. "You don't really care about Mr. Manafort's bank fraud. ... What you really care about is what information Mr. Manafort could give you that would reflect on Mr. Trump or lead to his prosecution or impeachment."
Politico
...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway."This is a massive indictment," the defense attorney said. "We were envisioning a trial in this case in November, following the case in D.C."
"You need to go back to the optometrist," Ellis shot back.
Politico
