DOJ Wants to Show Jury Roger Stone Is a Bigger Liar Than He's Charged With Being
The government wants to show that Stone "did not come in like a surgeon, trying to lie about one specific question."
September 25, 2019 at 02:36 PM
5 minute read
Federal prosecutors want to prove that Roger Stone is a liar—and not just about his contacts with WikiLeaks.
During a pretrial hearing in federal court Wednesday, attorneys with the U.S. Attorney's Office for D.C. urged U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the District of Columbia to allow them to argue before a jury that Stone wanted to obstruct the House Intelligence Committee's Russia investigation with not just the false statements he's charged with making, but through other alleged lies too.
They honed in on Stone's response to a question about whether he had been in touch with the Trump campaign over a political action committee Stone started in support of the then-candidate, saying the longtime GOP operative lied when he told the committee he hadn't.
"The government's position is he went in with the intent to lie. Not only lie about his communications with WikiLeaks, but also as to any other matter," said Michael Marando, an assistant attorney general.
Marando said that pertained to Stone's contacts with the Trump campaign, alleging that Stone "went in with a clear plan to lie, to separate himself from the campaign, in order to shield the lies about his connections to WikiLeaks."
And he said that federal prosecutors have "voluminous evidence" showing Stone was in "communication with the highest levels of the campaign," about the PAC, just short of candidate Trump himself.
Jackson seemed wary of allowing the evidence to come into court, raising concerns that it would add time to the trial in order to prove an allegation that Stone wasn't charged with.
But Marando argued the government wants to show that Stone "did not come in like a surgeon, trying to lie about one specific question."
"He went in with a mindset, your honor. And his mindset was, 'I'm going to obstruct this investigation,'" Marando said.
Stone's Fort Lauderdale-based attorney Bruce Rogow said the evidence should not be admitted into court. He argued that doing so would open the door as to whether Stone violated campaign finance laws, and that contact with the campaign did not fall under the scope of the House Intelligence Committee's Russia probe Stone was testifying in.
While Jackson did not rule on the matter, she made it clear that she was not buying Stone's defense that he may have been "mistaken" in answering some questions before the committee.
"I'm not persuaded by one of the arguments the defense made, that the answer was unclear," Jackson said. "I think 'no' is about as clear of a 'no' a person can give."
She also took a swipe at Stone's and Rogow's frequent efforts to bring up whether Stone's rights to free speech are being put on trial.
"Once again, this trial is not going to be about the First Amendment," Jackson said, "despite his dogged efforts to turn it into a discussion of that topic."
Jackson also rejected Stone's efforts to include evidence on Russian election interference in the trial. She sided with the government's assertions that Stone will largely be on trial for allegedly lying to Congress, and not on hacking charges.
"This was an investigation," she said, noting that Stone's allegedly false statements stopped the House from being thorough in following other lines of investigation and obtaining materials that Stone claimed in his testimony didn't exist.
And she wasn't happy about Rogow's insinuation that he may raise questions about former special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation in questioning potential witnesses, like Jerome Corsi or former White House strategist Steve Bannon.
"We're not going to try the investigators here, or the investigation," Jackson said.
But Rogow said he may have to do so when pressing certain witnesses like Corsi, who has said he was offered a plea deal by Mueller, about the circumstances of such agreements.
Jackson did not rule on the issue, but said she wants to avoid "having heated arguments in front of the jury or long bench conferences" if she believes some of Rogow's questions are out of line.
Jackson also ruled on some of the government's list of proposed exhibits. The judge left it up to attorneys for the government and Stone to figure out a deal regarding whether a clip of "The Godfather: Part II" should be shown to the jury.
She stumbled over the pronunciation of the fictional character Frank Pentangeli, who Stone allegedly referenced while attempting to convince expected trial witness Randy Credico to not testify before the House committee.
Jackson also took issue with another government exhibit showing Stone's phone contacts with members of the Trump campaign, including the president. Stone's lawyers had objected to the use of the chart, arguing that it didn't tell the full picture of his contacts with the campaign.
While she said it could be used in trial, Jackson said she found the color choices on the chart too confusing to follow along.
"There should be three clearly different colors," she instructed the Justice Department lawyers. "A light blue, a red or something else. Something you can tell is not blue."
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 AllAfter Regime Change, Syria Remains Liable in US Federal Courts for Alleged Assad-Era Terrorism Support
3 minute readSplit 4th Circuit Ruling Is a Win for Covington & Burling in US Army Base Attack Litigation
3 minute readA Conversation with NLJ Lifetime Achievement Award Winner Jeff Smith
11 minute readTrending Stories
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