Election sign-ups in LR hit a record
27 candidates file for mayor, board
A record number of candidates are running for mayor and for offices overall in Little Rock, with a five-way race for mayor and a nine-way race for the Ward 1 city director seat.
Twenty-seven people had filed bids for municipal positions by Friday’s noon deadline, which is the highest number recorded since the first Little Rock Board of Directors took office in 1957 with a city manager form of government.
Previously, the highest number of mayoral candidates was four, in the
2006 elec- tion when there was no incumbent on the ballot. Mayor Mark Stodola, who is not seeking re-election after serving three four-year terms, took office in 2007.
In 1992, the last year before the city began electing its mayor by popular vote rather than board selection, 26 people ran for board seats. There were 22 candidates for municipal positions in 1994 and 1998.
Ward 1, which encompasses downtown Little Rock and the eastern part of the city, has traditionally had a high number of hopefuls compared with the other seats. Seven people ran in 1998, when no
to return Monday morning.
Ellis made the surprising statement about the threats during a hearing at which a consortium of news organizations pressed for the release of the jurors’ names, along with other documents sealed during the trial. The judge rejected the request for juror information, citing security concerns.
There have been specific threats, Ellis said, although he declined to provide details. He said if jurors’ names were exposed they would be threatened as well, and for their “peace and safety,” he would not release their names.
“I had no idea this case would excite these emotions, I can tell you frankly,” the judge said.
Ellis was more accommodating on another request made by the press. He said some of the sealed material involved “the court’s administration of the jury in this case” and would be unsealed when the trial ends.
One bench conference would remain sealed, Ellis said, “because I don’t want to interfere with any ongoing investigation.”
A media coalition including The Washington Post, The New York Times, CNN and BuzzFeed filed motions requesting sealed discussions and records from the trial to be made public. The group also asked for the names and addresses of jurors and alternates.
In making the request, the media groups said the information is public under the First Amendment and common law, and would “aid the public’s understanding of this important case.”
Earlier in the day, Ellis said he was open to scrutiny. “A thirsty press is essential to a free country,” he said.
The financial fraud trial is the first courtroom test of the Russia probe led by special counsel Robert Mueller. And while the case doesn’t involve allegations of Russian election interference or possible coordination by the Trump campaign, it has been closely watched by Trump.
Trump on Friday issued a fresh defense of Manafort and called him a “very good person.”
“I think the whole Manafort trial is very sad,” Trump told reporters at the White House.
“When you look at what’s going on, I think it’s a very sad day for our country,” he said. “He worked for me for a very short period of time. But you know what, he happens to be a very good person and I think it’s very sad what they’ve done to Paul Manafort.”
Trump declined to comment on whether he would pardon his former campaign chairman.
Manafort faces 18 charges of tax and bank fraud. Prosecutors say he hid millions of dollars from the Internal Revenue Service in overseas bank accounts and then lied to banks to obtain multimillion-dollar loans.
On Thursday, as the jury of six women and six men neared the end of its first day of deliberations, it sent a note to the judge asking for technical answers to legal issues raised by Manafort’s lawyers.
Two of the questions sought definitions of laws or technical terms. They also asked the judge to define “reasonable doubt.”
On Friday, the jury’s questions to the judge suggested they may trip over at least four of the 18 counts against Manafort. He’s accused of failing to file foreign bank account reports for 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014.
U.S. taxpayers must file foreign bank account reports if they had financial interests in and authority over accounts in foreign countries valued at more than $10,000. Taxpayers must file reports separately from their tax returns. Manafort faces five counts of filing false tax returns that failed to disclose his foreign accounts and understated income.
Prosecutors said Manafort owned and controlled 31 foreign accounts and that more than $60 million flowed through them from 2010 to 2014. But defense lawyers argued that prosecutors failed to prove that Manafort controlled those accounts, with names like Global Highway Limited, Leviathan Advisors Limited and Lucicle Consultants Limited.
The jurors asked whether someone is required to file foreign bank account reports if he owns less than 50 percent of an account and doesn’t have signature authority but is authorized to disburse funds. That suggests that jurors are wrestling with how to apply the law’s complex requirements to the murky structures set up by Manafort’s law firm in Cyprus.
The Justice Department rarely tries to prove criminal foreign account report violations at trial. Instead, it forced thousands of U.S. taxpayers to pay large civil penalties during a crackdown over the past decade on offshore tax evasion, primarily in Switzerland.
A pioneer in the Justice Department’s use of foreign bank account reports penalties against taxpayers was Kevin Downing, who’s now in private practice and Manafort’s lead lawyer.
Manafort faces the prospect of spending the rest of his life in prison if convicted. He also faces a second trial next month in Washington, D.C., on charges that he failed to register as a lobbyist for the Ukraine government and conspired to tamper with witnesses in that case.