Manafort....

[BoyNextDoor]

You should look up the Exclusionary Rule and understand what "fruit of the poisonous tree" means..

You should look up the "rule of law" and "no one is above the law" and "due process".

BTW neither you nor your faux reporting by Solomon is making a "fruit of the poisonous tree" argument.

 

[LincolnDuncan]

John Solomon just uncovered evidence that night see Manafort's lawyers submitting a writ of habeas corpus. Can anyone say "fruit of the poisonous tree."

From the article:


FBI, warned early and often that Manafort file might be fake, used it anyway
BY JOHN SOLOMON, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR — 06/19/19 10:30 AM EDT


"The second document, known as the “black cash ledger,” remarkably has escaped the same scrutiny, even though its emergence in Ukraine in the summer of 2016 forced Paul Manafort to resign as Trump's campaign chairman and eventually face U.S. indictment.

In search warrant affidavits, the FBI portrayed the ledger as one reason it resurrected a criminal case against Manafort that was dropped in 2014 and needed search warrants in 2017 for bank records to prove he worked for the Russian-backed Party of Regions in Ukraine.

There’s just one problem: The FBI’s public reliance on the ledger came months after the feds were warned repeatedly that the document couldn’t be trusted and likely was a fake, according to documents and more than a dozen interviews with knowledgeable sources.

For example, Ukraine’s top anticorruption prosecutor, Nazar Kholodnytsky, told me he warned the U.S. State Department’s law enforcement liaison and multiple FBI agents in late summer 2016 that Ukrainian authorities who recovered the ledger believed it likely was a fraud.

It was not to be considered a document of Manafort. It was not authenticated. And at that time it should not be used in any way to bring accusations against anybody,” Kholodnytsky said, recalling what he told FBI agents."

(evidence that night see Manafort's lawyers)

I think that you meant to type might

 

[Que]

You should look up the "rule of law" and "no one is above the law" and "due process".

BTW neither you nor your faux reporting by Solomon is making a "fruit of the poisonous tree" argument.

Everything you just espoused is exactly wrong.

"Due process" to you means that withholding of exculpatory evidence is okie dokie as long as you get the trial concluded and the conviction recorded before it comes out?

It is also not "no one is above the law." The phrase applicable to this situation is "equal protection OF the law." Law exists to protect our rights, not to ensure convictions.

"The rule of law" means that the law, not the whims of prosecutors, judges or juries prevails.

I'm glad you're not an appeals court judge.

 

[Rightguide]

You should look up the "rule of law" and "no one is above the law" and "due process".

BTW neither you nor your faux reporting by Solomon is making a "fruit of the poisonous tree" argument.

His lawyers will do that in court. If successful the "fruit of the poisonous tree" argument maintains the rule of law by making sure overzealous and or corrupt prosecutors stay within the limits of the law themselves.

 

[Rightguide]

(evidence that night see Manafort's lawyers)

I think that you meant to type might

Thanks for the heads up.

 

[Rightguide]

I read this as manfart.

We're all unique. When I see Bigsly posting I think of manfart.

 

[doowdniw]

Is potentially exculpatory evidence required to be included in an affidavit supporting a request for a search warrant?

 

[Rightguide]

Is potentially exculpatory evidence required to be included in an affidavit supporting a request for a search warrant?

I don't think so. This from Justia:

Search Warrant Requirements
The Fourth Amendment itself identifies the criteria for obtaining a lawful search warrant. A police officer, or other official seeking a warrant, must establish probable cause to the satisfaction of a judge, must make an “[o]ath or affirmation” as to the truth of the matters supporting probable cause, and must “particularly describ[e] the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” A search warrant is invalid if it covers too broad an area or does not identify specific items or persons.

Exclusionary Rule
The “exclusionary rule” requires courts to suppress evidence obtained through an unlawful search or seizure. See Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961). Any evidence derived from illegally obtained evidence must also be suppressed. This type of evidence is known as “fruit of the poisonous tree.” Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, 251 U.S. 385 (1920; Nardone v. United States, 308 U.S. 338, 341 (1939.

In the Manafort case the the FBI was warned in several occasions the "black Ledger" was most likely a fake document, but they used it anyway. That exculpatory evidence was apparently withheld from the Manafort's attorneys.

 

[Que]

Is potentially exculpatory evidence required to be included in an affidavit supporting a request for a search warrant?

If it obviates the impetus for the search warrant, I don't see how you get to selectively filter the evidence to get a different outcome if what you clearly knew when you applied for the warrant was a manifestly different from the impression artificially created by presenting only supporting material, devoid of contect.

If you know you are putting one over on the judge the judge is obviously not going to be happy when he realizes that you put one over on him.

 

[Luk]

We're all unique. When I see Bigsly posting I think of manfart.

You think of a man's asshole flatulating when you see another man post

 

[Que]

You think flatulence is gay?

 

[oralaccents]

Luk thinks his bigsly alt is a man?

 

[HisArpy]

Luk thinks his bigsly alt is a man?

Luk thinks that pictures of women in magazines are his girlfriend.



He has a LOT of "girlfriends" but seems to spend "date night" in the bathroom for some reason. But that's okay, his GF du page is in there with him.

 

[Luk]

You think flatulence is gay?

No, Tweak.

Luk thinks his bigsly alt is a man?

Luk thinks that pictures of women in magazines are his girlfriend.



He has a LOT of "girlfriends" but seems to spend "date night" in the bathroom for some reason. But that's okay, his GF du page is in there with him.

^^^^^ "Owned by Luk" slut collars for you both.

 

[doowdniw]

If the "black ledger" was "one reason", doesn't that imply there were other reason? It's not like anyone was arguing that it was the only reason. Does that make a difference in this whole fruit of the poisonous tree question?

 

[Rightguide]

Luk thinks that pictures of women in magazines are his girlfriend.



He has a LOT of "girlfriends" but seems to spend "date night" in the bathroom for some reason. But that's okay, his GF du page is in there with him.

LOL...

 

[Rightguide]

If the "black ledger" was "one reason", doesn't that imply there were other reason? It's not like anyone was arguing that it was the only reason. Does that make a difference in this whole fruit of the poisonous tree question?

That implication of another document was my mistake in selectively choosing which paragraphs to post. The ledger was the primary document used to open the investigation into the Manafort case closed by the DOJ years earlier. Here is the link to the article:

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-h...at-manafort-file-might-be-fake-used-it-anyway

 

[HisArpy]

If the "black ledger" was "one reason", doesn't that imply there were other reason? It's not like anyone was arguing that it was the only reason. Does that make a difference in this whole fruit of the poisonous tree question?

The poisonous tree analogy doesn't really fit this particular situation. Our government didn't do anything except rely on evidence which was possibly fabricated. They weren't the ones who did the fabrication, so relying on it is ok even if there's a possibility it's false. It's up to the defense to raise that issue.

However, what's not known (to me anyway) is whether the gov "knew and covered up" the issue of the ledger possibly being a fabrication.

That's where the issue of failing to reveal exculpatory evidence comes into play. Weisman has been guilty of this failure in the past.

If Weisman knew and didn't provide that info, the convictions will be overturned EVEN IF Manafort was actually guilty.

Lady Justice is blind. She can only rely on the evidence presented to her when she makes her decisions. If the evidence is a lie, then her decision is based on a lie. Such a decision cannot stand regardless of the reason behind the lie.

OTOH, if the possibility of the ledger being faked was revealed, even if only in a small obscure way, then Manafort may have an appeal based on ineffective of counsel.

Those odds are long but they aren't non-existent. It would depend on the facts as to whether the odds can be shortened or not. 2 governments conspiring together to fabricate evidence and then obstruct and delay revealing that information in time for the defendant to use it at trial in order to convict a US citizen might be enough.

 

[Luk]

LOL...

You used to cam with Kenneth, vettebitch.

 

[Rightguide]

The poisonous tree analogy doesn't really fit this particular situation. Our government didn't do anything except rely on evidence which was possibly fabricated. They weren't the ones who did the fabrication, so relying on it is ok even if there's a possibility it's false. It's up to the defense to raise that issue.

However, what's not known (to me anyway) is whether the gov "knew and covered up" the issue of the ledger possibly being a fabrication.

That's where the issue of failing to reveal exculpatory evidence comes into play. Weisman has been guilty of this failure in the past.

If Weisman knew and didn't provide that info, the convictions will be overturned EVEN IF Manafort was actually guilty.

Lady Justice is blind. She can only rely on the evidence presented to her when she makes her decisions. If the evidence is a lie, then her decision is based on a lie. Such a decision cannot stand regardless of the reason behind the lie.

OTOH, if the possibility of the ledger being faked was revealed, even if only in a small obscure way, then Manafort may have an appeal based on ineffective of counsel.

Those odds are long but they aren't non-existent. It would depend on the facts as to whether the odds can be shortened or not. 2 governments conspiring together to fabricate evidence and then obstruct and delay revealing that information in time for the defendant to use it at trial in order to convict a US citizen might be enough.

Solomon's article implies they knew:

"For example, Ukraine’s top anticorruption prosecutor, Nazar Kholodnytsky, told me he warned the U.S. State Department’s law enforcement liaison and multiple FBI agents in late summer 2016 that Ukrainian authorities who recovered the ledger believed it likely was a fraud.

“It was not to be considered a document of Manafort. It was not authenticated. And at that time it should not be used in any way to bring accusations against anybody,” Kholodnytsky said, recalling what he told FBI agents."

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-h...at-manafort-file-might-be-fake-used-it-anyway

 

[HisArpy]

Solomon's article implies they knew:

"For example, Ukraine’s top anticorruption prosecutor, Nazar Kholodnytsky, told me he warned the U.S. State Department’s law enforcement liaison and multiple FBI agents in late summer 2016 that Ukrainian authorities who recovered the ledger believed it likely was a fraud.

“It was not to be considered a document of Manafort. It was not authenticated. And at that time it should not be used in any way to bring accusations against anybody,” Kholodnytsky said, recalling what he told FBI agents."

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-h...at-manafort-file-might-be-fake-used-it-anyway

As we have learned from recent events, anyone can say anything after the fact and the media will report it as truth.

The key here will be producing evidence from gov records that the FBI was told and either disregarded the notification or failed to reveal it to the defense.

 

[Rightguide]

As we have learned from recent events, anyone can say anything after the fact and the media will report it as truth.

The key here will be producing evidence from gov records that the FBI was told and either disregarded the notification or failed to reveal it to the defense.

This is true. I wonder if the Black Ledger had the same creator as the now discredited Dossier.

 

[icanhelp1]

This is true. I wonder if the Black Ledger had the same creator as the now discredited Dossier.

AH! The fruit of the poisonous tree, this stinks of all get out of that piece of shit ANDREW WEISSMANN!!!! Another echo chamber to defraud the courts.

 

[Rightguide]

AH! The fruit of the poisonous tree, this stinks of all get out of that piece of shit ANDREW WEISSMANN!!!! Another echo chamber to defraud the courts.

Andrew can be counted on to do what he does best, defraud the court.

 

[oralaccents]

Is someone actually suggesting Manafort shouldn't be in jail?

Now that's funny!