In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE, FP, Georgia, NYT,  Azerbaijan, CSM Click here to contact us     .

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Maxwell book
BBC - Honduras - CIA Trial book - NY Mag

EDNY COURTHOUSE, Oct 17 – Thomas Barrack and Matthew Grimes, indicted for illegal lobbying for the United Arab Emirates, were arraigned on July 26, 2021 before U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York Magistrate Judge Sanket Bulsara. Inner City Press live tweeted it here (and podcast here)

On October 4, FBI Special Agent Liz Sidaros was still on the stand, but now for cross examination.  Barrack's lawyer asked her what Instagram is, then emphasized that neither Malik nor Barrack were sneaking around.  He showed Barrack's disclosure to the US State Department when he applied for the US diplomatic job, as Rex Tillerson testified on October 3. Then Colony Capital marketing materials, including Barrack's links withe First Republic Bank and others.

On October 17, the trial was delayed: "Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Brian M. Cogan: Jury Trial as to Thomas Joseph Barrack, Matthew Grimes held on 10/17/2022. All parties present. Two jurors absent due to illness. No evidence taken. Jury Trial adjourned and to be continued on 10/18/2022 at 9:30 A.M. in Courtroom 8D South." Watch this site.

On Sunday October 16, Judge Cogan ruled "Barrack’s [321, 322] request for reconsideration is granted. Finding a waiver or failure to demonstrate privilege is too severe a sanction for the errors of Barrack’s counsel. In a trial of this complexity, a ball or two will inevitably be dropped, and crucially, the record does not reflect Barrack “treat[ing] the communications in question in such a careless manner as to negate [his] intent to keep them confidential.” U.S. v. Mejia, 655 F.3d 126, 134 (2d Cir. 2011). The Court has reviewed the retention agreements that Thomas Davis and/or his firm, Davis Advisors LLC (“Davis Advisors”), entered into with defense counsel for Barrack on February 26, 2019, August 29, 2021, and October 26, 2021, respectively. Barrack has met his burden of showing that Davis was acting as an agent of defense counsel. See U.S. v. Kovel, 296 F.2d 918, 923 (2d Cir. 1961); von Bulow by Auersperg v. von Bulow, 811 F.2d 136, 146 (2d Cir. 1987). Thus, communications between and among Davis, Davis Advisors, Barrack, Steptoe & Johnson, LLP, Paul Hastings LLP, O’Melveny & Myers LLP, and/or Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, made on or after February 26, 2019, are privileged to the extent that each individual communication was made “in confidence for the purpose of obtaining legal advice" - full order on Patreon here.

US filing on Patreon here.

On FARA, full order on Patreon here.

Analysis: Because of the possibility of (success) appeal to any conviction under Section 951, on a claim that the jurors confused it with FARA, the attempt is made to keep FARA out of testimony as much as possible. But what about the jury instructions? Watch this site.

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA

Mail: Box 20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017

Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540

Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2022 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com