Evidence vs Trump aide questioned
Judge warns against irrelevant matters, leading statements and courtroom dramatics in trial of Paul Manafort
VIRGINIA— Prosecutors from special counsel Robert Mueller’s office presented to a federal court trial in Alexandria invoices that appeared to be fake, twowitnesses testified on Wednesday.
The evidence was presented in the trial of US President Donald Trump’s former campaign chief Paul Manafort, who was charged with tax fraud, bank fraud and failing to report foreign bank accounts.
At the same time, US District Judge T.S. Ellis III, warned lawyers not to introduce irrelevant evidence and use leading words or language or other courtroom dramatics.
Lavish lifestyle
Many of the eight witnesses who testified on the second day of Manafort’s trial work for vendors who, over the years, provided luxury goods and services to the Manafort family.
Two key witnesses were Maximillian Katzman, of New York’s custom clothier Alan Couture, and Stephen Jacobsen, a contractor who did renovations for Manafort.
It is unclear who created the invoices but it stemmed from Mueller’s investigation of Russia’s role in the 2016 election.
Between 2010 and 2014, Jacobsen confirmed he billed Manafort more than $3 million for various renovation projects and Mueller’s lawyers then displayed a copy of a purported invoice.
Fake evidence
It contained an imprint of his company’s logo but billed for architectural services and listed as the client a company called Global Endeavor, which prosecutors claim to be tied to Manafort.
But Jacobsen disputed the authenticity of the invoice, saying “that is not a bill from my company,” adding that Global Endeavor was never a client nor did his firm provide architectural services.
Katzman provided similar testimony about two invoices he was shown by prosecutors that contained small mistakes in the spelling of Alan Couture’s name and address.
“There are errors again with our company name and zip code,” he said.
Not a crime
Throughout the hearing, Mueller’s lawyers repeatedly clashed with Ellis about the evidence they sought to introduce and Ellis scolded them for presenting irrelevant evidence.
“Mr. Manafort is not on trial for having a lavish lifestyle,” Ellis said.
Leading language
Out of the jury’s earshot, the judge also scolded both sides for using the word “oligarch,” adding that the term simply meant rich people but had negative connotations.
Ellis noted that wealthy Democratic donor George Soros or the Koch family, which owns the second-largest private company in the United States, could qualify as oligarchs.
Crux of the matter
Ellis reminded the lawyers that the trial was about tax fraud, bank fraud and failing to report foreign bank accounts, none of which related to Russian meddling in the US election.
At the center of the trial is whether Manafort hid part of the estimated $60 million that prosecutors say he earned for consulting with the pro-Russia Ukrainian government.
After a rough day at the courtroom, Mueller’s lawyers said they were moving ahead of schedule and intended to rest their case after presenting two more vendors as well as bookkeepers and accountants for Manafort.
Gates testimony
But Mueller’s lawyer Uzo Asonye caused a stir after he told Ellis that Manafort’s former business partner Rick Gates, who pleaded guilty to making false statements after being indicted by Mueller, “may testify in this case, he may not.”
Defense lawyers have painted gates as an untrustworthy business partner who embezzled funds from Manafort’s consulting firm.
WEARE ALL ACUTELYAWARE OF THE STORM CLOUDS OF TRADEWAR Vivian Balakrishnan Singapore Foreign Minister