His life is on the line—the rest of it—yet Paul Manafort’s lawyers have opted for a risky defense strategy. Risky when so much is at stake.
Instead of mounting a defense against the oddly timed prosecution out of the Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office, Manafort’s lead attorney Kevin Downing decides to wing it. His defense relied on cross examination of the prosecution’s witnesses.
Apparently the belief is that juries are sophisticated enough to discern that “the government has not met its burden of proof.”
“This is very common after prosecution rests to file a motion saying they didn’t meet the burden beyond a reasonable doubt,” said John Cohen, a former homeland security official and ABC New contributor. “Typically, this doesn’t work.”
Manafort’s lawyers clearly felt that gambling was the way to go, here. After all, what’s there to lose? The rest of their client’s life?
Dumb lawyer gambled with his client’s life and the client lost.
Poor #PaulManafort's dumb lawyer gambled with his client's life and the client lost. He put on no active case, believing juries were sophisticated enough to discern that “the government has not met its burden of proof.” https://t.co/w4tilsTqjj
— Ilana Mercer (@IlanaMercer) August 22, 2018