OPENING STATEMENTS IN MANAFORT JURY TRIAL

[DOJ Seal from wikipedia]

A lot has been written about the ongoing federal criminal jury trial of Paul Manafort.  Today, I don't intend to discuss the merits of the Mueller team's case against the former campaign coordinator of President Trump.  Instead, I want to focus on the government prosecutor's manner of making his opening statement.  He read it!

In particular, according to news reports, the prosecutor read his entire opening statement to the jury.  Reading an opening statement or a closing argument is a pet peeve of mine!  In my opinion, no trial lawyer should ever READ an opening statement!  Instead, I believe a good trial lawyer will be so prepared that he or she will be able to speak, without reading, their statement or argument.  Nobody likes to be read to.  Also, by speaking, instead of reading, a trial lawyer is better able to both make eye contact with jurors and to display a greater degree of confidence and preparedness!

As a former federal prosecutor in Augusta, Georgia for over twenty years, I prosecuted and saw countless federal criminal trials.  In my opinion, the best lawyers never read their openings or closings!

I am sure the government's attorney in this case is a fine lawyer!  But in my opinion, opening statements should be spoken but NOT read!

What do you think?

PROFFERS IN FEDERAL CRIMINAL CASES

[Photo from Wikipedia]

     A proffer is a method often employed by criminal defense attorneys and federal prosecutors to meet and discuss how a defendant could help the government in its investigation, without risking further incrimination.  In short, a proffer involves making an "off the record" offer of proof, in order to help the parties potentially progress further toward a negotiated settlement of some sort.  In some criminal cases, the defendant may simply get a better plea bargain.  In other cases, he or she may obtain immunity from prosecution.

     It is important that a defendant retain a defense lawyer who is knowledgeable about proffers and how cases are made in the federal criminal courts.  Experience counts!  It is also important that your defense attorney should obtain a written proffer letter agreement which clearly sets forth that any proffer is off the record.

     Richard H. Goolsby, Sr., of the Goolsby Law Firm LLC, is Augusta, Georgia's only former twenty year federal prosecutor.  Please call us at (706) 863-5281 for a free initial consultation.

DOJ TO ADD 300 NEW FEDERAL PROSECUTORS

[D.O.J seal depiction from wikipedia]

     According to various news reports, the United States Department of Justice has announced today that approximately 300 new assistant U.S. attorneys will be hired around the country to help meet the President's crime-fighting agenda.
     The DOJ said it will add 190 violent crime prosecutors, 86 civil enforcement prosecutors, and 35 immigration prosecutors.
     As a former A.U.S.A. for more than 20 years in Augusta, Georgia, I can attest to the good work generally done by the DOJ in the field.
     Here's hoping that the addition of these prosecutors will help combat crime on the federal level.

WHITE COLLAR CRIME DEFINED

[Photo of Sociologist Edwin Sutherland from wikipedia]

In 1939, famous sociologist Edwin Sutherland defined white collar crime as crime committed by a person of respectability and high social status in the course of his occupation.

This definition has been criticized by many other the years since then.  For example, as a part-time criminal justice professor, I have often taken issue with Sutherland's definition because it requires that the crime must have been committed by a person of "high social status" in order to be classified as white collar crime.  In my opinion, even an embezzlement committed by a low level bank teller would constitute white collar crime.

Do you agree? What is your opinion about Sutherland's definition of white collar crime?

BLAGOJEVICH APPEAL DENIED AGAIN

[Blagojevich photo from wikipedia]

     According to news reports, the appeal to the United States Supreme Court on behalf of former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich has been denied a second time.

     As you recall, Blagojevich was convicted for, among other things, trying to sell the former Senate seat of former President Obama.

     Blagojevich will reportedly be eligible for release in 2024.

DOJ INSPECTOR GENERAL TO INVESTIGATE FISA ABUSES

[Image from wikipedia]

     It finally has been confirmed by various news reports today that the D.O.J. Inspector
General has opened an investigation into the FISA abuses by top members and agents of the D.O.J. and F.B.I.  You will, of course, recall that, according to the Nunes memo, a small group of top D.O.J. and F.B.I. officials, among other alleged abuses, used the "salacious and unverified" dirty Steele dossier to obtain FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. If substantiated, this would be the first reported time in American history that one candidate (and top administration officials) have spied on the opposing party's candidate during an election year.

     As a former federal prosecutor, I cannot imagine a larger, more serious white collar crime! Here's hoping that justice will be served and that such abuses never occur again. Here's also hoping that the guilty are brought to justice!

     What is your opinion?

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS REMAIN CONCERNING FISA ABUSES

[Photo from wikipedia]

Many questions remain concerning the alleged abuses of the FISA court process by top DOJ lawyers and FBI agents during the 2016 presidential campaign and thereafter.

For example, will Attorney General Jeff Sessions appoint a special prosecutor to investigate this abuse of power? In an interview yesterday with Fox journalist Shannon Bream, Sessions again indicated that the FISA abuses would be investigated and that he has also appointed an experienced DOJ attorney from outside Washington to look into it.

How does the FISA Court feel about reportedly being abused in this manner?

But I also wonder how much information was obtained by federal agents?  How far did this corruption extend, after they allegedly abused the FISA court to spy on the opposition candidate during an election year, while using opposition research paid for by the Clinton campaign and the DNC? In other words, has anyone investigated how many tape recordings were made and with whom, or how many emails were tracked, and on whose private conversations did agents eavesdrop?

Many questions remain and yet there are so few answers! Here's hoping that somebody, perhaps the Inspector General or maybe Mr. Session's unnamed attorney friend, will shake some trees and get some answers!