Quarrels Continue as Judge Pushes Prosecutors in Manafort Trial
Judge T.S. Ellis III and prosecutor Greg Andrews again quarreled over the relevance of testimony and the trial's speed Wednesday.
August 08, 2018 at 02:01 PM
6 minute read
Judge T.S. Ellis III has emerged as much a character as any lawyer, witness or juror in the courtroom for the tax and bank fraud trial of Paul Manafort. He's quibbled and quarreled with lawyers, needled prosecutors over “extraneous” evidence and at times irked witnesses.
On Wednesday, lawyers moved through questioning of Rick Gates, an FBI accountant and an IRS agent. As dry testimony dominated the day, the judge's personality once again came into full display.
Here are some key exchanges from the seventh day of the Manafort's Virginia trial.
“Don't try my patience.”
After Rick Gates' examination wrapped up, prosecutors called FBI forensic accountant Morgan Magionos. She described how Manafort avoided reporting foreign income by transferring money from his foreign bank accounts into the pockets of various domestic vendors, such as a home improvement company, a clothier and others.
But for a quarter-hour leading up to her testimony, Ellis quarreled with prosecutors over the redundancy of the testimony—a recurring theme of the trial.
Manafort defense attorney Richard Westling took issue with some of the evidence she was about to raise—charts noting some of Manafort's payments to vendors—arguing it was repetitive of what domestic vendors who had already testified. “We've heard it all before,” he said.
But prosecutor Greg Andres disagreed. While vendors had testified about the “domestic half,” Magionos would capture the “whole picture” of the flow of money, he said.
When Ellis urged Andres to move things along, Andres fought back. The government, he said, had sharply focused its case for a long time and was not delaying the trial.
Ellis fired back: “I'm not saying you are.”
Later, on whether the lawyers on both sides had an agreement about what kinds of evidence could be introduced, Andres said “I apologize” if this seems argumentative, before he noted that defense lawyers hadn't offered a stipulation. At that point, Westling said he would offer one.
“I'm at a loss. We've prepared our case, we're ready to go,” Andres said. “And the defense now wants to stipulate? It would be quicker to get the witness on.”
The judge let the argument die down, but not without issuing a joke combined with a warning.
“Judges should be patient. They made a mistake when they confirmed me,” Ellis said to courtroom laughter. “Don't try my patience.”
During Magionos' testimony, the courtroom broke for lunch. Just before, Andres told the judge he had about an hour of direct examination of the FBI accountant left to go.
“I thought we were shortening it,” the judge said with a small smile.
Ellis Takes Aim at Another Prosecutor:
Just before bringing in the day's third witness—Michael Welch, an Internal Revenue Service agent—prosecutor Uzo Asonye consulted Downing for a moment. Ellis had something to say on the chatter.
“I encourage it if it's going to have the effect of shortening this proceeding,” he said.
One of the lawyers perked up: “Could we have a moment?”
“You could have a day,” Ellis replied.
As Asonye asked the judge if they could take their conversation outside, Ellis corrected himself. “Yes, you may, but I was only kidding about a day,” he said.
Ellis reserved harsher words for Asonye, as he and the Eastern District of Virginia prosecutor got into a row over whether Welch, an expert witness, had been permitted to attend the trial's proceedings before he testified.
It began when Asonye direct examined Welch and indicated the IRS agent had been in the courtroom, leading up to his testimony. Welch often sits in the front of Ellis' courtroom.
But that appeared to be news for Ellis, who stopped to tell Asonye that he barred witnesses from attending proceedings, “typically” only allowing case agents to sit in. The judge said that in this instance, he would let it slide.
But when Asonye referenced a transcript, which would indicate the judge had indeed allowed Welch to attend, Ellis snapped at the prosecutor: “Let me be clear, I don't care what the transcript said … don't do it again.”
“Fair enough, your honor,” Asonye said.
Talk of Infidelity Returns
The testimony of Rick Gates, the trial's star witness, wrapped up Wednesday morning, but not without one revelation that, once again, sent reporters darting out of Ellis' courtroom.
In a re-cross examination, Downing suggested Gates had engaged in four, instead of one, extramarital affair. “Do you recall telling the office of special counsel that you actually engaged in four extramarital affairs?” he asked Gates. That prompted an immediate objection from the U.S. on relevance grounds.
It goes to “to whether he lied yesterday,” Downing shot back.
As lawyers walked to the judge's bench for a sidebar discussion, multiple reporters raced out of the room. Gates, seated just feet away from the lawyers' conversation, stared ahead in silence.
Coming out of the bench conference, Downing appeared to back down, only referring back to Gates' “secret life” and how long it lasted.
“I've made many mistakes over many years, and I regret them,” Gates replied.
“Rocket Docket” Proceeding on Pace
Just before cutting out of court Wednesday evening, Ellis asked prosecutors how many more witnesses they intend to call up.
Andres said there were approximately eight witnesses left, with none likely to last more than an hour. The U.S. was “certainly on pace” to wrap up its case by the end of Friday, he said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBen & Jerry’s Accuses Corporate Parent of ‘Silencing’ Support for Palestinian Rights
3 minute readBaltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
3 minute read5th Circuit Judge Jones Slams Proposal for Greater Amicus Brief Funding Disclosure
'Health Care Behemoth'?: DOJ Seeks Injunction Blocking $3.3B UnitedHealth Merger Proposal
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Why Kramer Levin Decided to Merge
- 2Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-61
- 3Decision of the Day: School District's Probe Was a 'Sham'; Title IX Administrator Showed Sex-Based Bias
- 4US Magistrate Judge Embry Kidd Confirmed to 11th Circuit
- 5Shaq Signs $11 Million Settlement to Resolve Astrals Investor Claims
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250