Roger Stone Is Guilty of All Counts, Says DC Jury
The jury has found Stone guilty of lying to Congress, impeding a congressional investigation and witness tampering.
November 15, 2019 at 11:51 AM
7 minute read
A federal jury has found longtime GOP operative Roger Stone guilty of lying to Congress, impeding a congressional investigation and witness tampering.
The two-week trial and verdict wrap up one of the few remaining loose ends from then-special counsel Robert Mueller's probe. Stone was indicted in January as Mueller investigated Russian interference into the U.S. election.
Stone showed little emotion as the verdict was read out by a court officer. Asked if he had a comment outside the courthouse doors, he replied, "none whatsoever."
Stone faces a maximum sentence of 50 years, if convicted on all charges. However, the sentence is likely to be far less than that.
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson set a Feb. 6 sentencing date for Stone. DOJ prosecutors asked that he be remanded into custody ahead of that date, but she declined, noting that Stone had appeared for each of his court dates and that she had "no reason to believe" he would not appear for sentencing.
However, she did not lift the gag order blocking Stone from speaking with the media, noting that it was issued as a condition of his release.
"I continue to have serious concerns, given the nature of some of the publicity that's attended these proceedings," Jackson said, adding that Stone's attorneys would have to request "in writing" that the gag order be lifted.
Stone, convicted of all charges and still under a gag order, exits the courthouse without addressing media. pic.twitter.com/fQTVxu2UWU
— Jacqueline Thomsen (@jacq_thomsen) November 15, 2019
The jury deliberated for less than two days and asked a pair of questions, apparently pertaining to one of the charges about whether Stone lied during his September 2017 testimony with the House Intelligence Committee about who he was referring to when he publicly discussed a backchannel to WikiLeaks in August 2016.
During closing arguments Wednesday, Stone attorney Bruce Rogow made the case to the jury that they didn't have enough evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to find his client guilty. And he said that, even if Stone were in contact with the 2016 Trump campaign about WikiLeaks, "so what?"
Rogow maintained that his client did nothing illegal in speaking out about WikiLeaks, which he said could all be traced back to publicly available information. He also said that when Stone testified before the House Intelligence Committee, where Stone allegedly made the false statements, he did it with only Russian election interference in mind.
DOJ prosecutor Jonathan Kravis painted a clearer picture for the jury during his closing. He played the audio of each of Stone's alleged lies to the House committee, and then presented the evidence, often in the form of emails or text messages, that showed Stone hadn't told the truth.
Kravis also said Stone pressured his associate, Randy Credico, not to testify with the committee because it could "expose" Stone's alleged lies.
The two-week long trial was a spectacle that drew far-right figures to the federal D.C. courthouse. Right-wing figures Milo Yiannopoulos and Jacob Wohl were among those spotted in court during the proceedings, and former Trump campaign adviser Michael Caputo also attended.
Caputo was removed from the courtroom after he turned his back to the jury, seemingly in response to the verdict.
The jury at the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia heard evidence in the case for less than four days, including testimony from five government witnesses. Testimony from the ex-FBI case agent for Stone, Michelle Taylor, and Credico dominated the majority of that time.
Former Trump campaign CEO Steve Bannon, Credico's friend Margaret Ratner Kunstler and ex-deputy Trump campaign manager Richard Gates also testified.
Stone's attorneys did not call forward any witnesses and did not publish or discuss any further documentary evidence for the jury. Rather, they played nearly an hour of Stone's 2017 interview with the House Intelligence Committee, during which he made the statements that were the basis for the trial, and rested their defense.
The verdict caps off a months-long court battle for Stone, which began long before the trial even began. U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the District of Columbia slapped Stone with a gag order, blocking him from discussing the case, after he posted an image on Instagram that depicted the judge with a crosshairs in the corner.
Jackson tightened that gag order over the summer, after Stone posted about court filings in his case on Instagram, blocking the defendant from using Instagram, Twitter and Facebook.
Stone's Ft. Lauderdale-based legal team, which also includes Robert Buschel, also lost efforts to include evidence on whether Russia interfered in the 2016 election. But they did win the ability to view redacted parts of Mueller's report, relevant to Stone's trial.
An open question after Stone's guilty verdict is whether Trump is considering a pardon for his longtime associate.
The trial offered damaging information about Trump's knowledge of upcoming information from WikiLeaks, after former Trump campaign deputy chairman Gates testified that he overheard a call between Stone and Trump in late July 2016. Gates said that, after that call, Trump "indicated that more information would be forthcoming."
The guilty verdict is among the last ones stemming from charges brought forward by Mueller's investigation. The U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia took over the case after the Mueller probe disbanded earlier this year.
Former national security adviser Michael Flynn and Gates, who both pleaded guilty to charges brought forward by Mueller, are still awaiting sentencing. And a Russian firm charged by Mueller with interfering in the 2016 election, Concord Management and Consulting, may go to trial next year.
Federal prosecutors in another Mueller-tied probe suffered a blow earlier this year, when former Obama White House counsel Greg Craig was acquitted of charges he deliberately deceived the Justice Department about his past work for Ukraine while he was a partner at the law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.
Read more:
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 AllTrump Likely to Keep Up Antitrust Enforcement, but Dial Back the Antagonism
5 minute readBig Law Practice Leaders 'Bullish' That Second Trump Presidency Will Be Good for Business
3 minute readLatham & Watkins Adds Regulatory Partner to Strengthen West Coast Crypto Presence
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 3Guarantees Are Back, Whether Law Firms Want to Talk About Them or Not
- 4How I Made Practice Group Chair: 'If You Love What You Do and Put the Time and Effort Into It, You Will Excel,' Says Lisa Saul of Forde & O'Meara
- 5Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
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