The real reason Paul Manafort didn’t bother to call a single witness during his trial
The prosecution rested yesterday in the Paul Manafort trial, meaning that as of today, it was Manafort’s big chance to finally call his own witnesses and make the case for his defense. Instead, Manafort and his legal team took a pass, calling no witnesses at all before resting their case. This has caused quite a bit of discussion, and some degree of concern. But it turns out this is not what it might seem.
Legal experts tell Palmer Report that it’s not all that unusual for a defense to decline to call any witnesses in a case like this. Why? The evidence, which is based largely on financial documents, and people testifying about their actions in relation to those documents, is cut and dry. Manafort can’t call anyone to the stand who can meaningfully testify that Manafort wasn’t doing these things. And if he did call anyone to testify as a character witness, it would give Mueller the opportunity to cross-examine that witness, opening up a can of worms about other things that Manafort has done wrong.
In reality, in a case like this, Manafort’s best shot at winning was to try to get Mueller’s witnesses to crack on cross examination. Manafort tried to do just that to his former longtime business partner Rick Gates, painting him as an admitted criminal whose word shouldn’t be trusted, but Gates held up pretty well. Beyond that, there really isn’t much else that Manafort and his attorneys could try.
Some have suggested that Paul Manafort didn’t bother to put on a defense because he knows he’s going to be acquitted or pardoned, but that kind of supposition is not based in legal reality. Manafort’s attorneys put on their “defense” when they went after Mueller’s witnesses on cross examination. That’s how this really works. Closing arguments for both sides will begin and end tomorrow, and then it’ll be in the hands of the jury.
