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 MEDIA ROOM, Oct 24 – 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 24, preparing for closing arguments, the US filed that "       Prior to opening statements, Defendants knew that the Court had (1) ordered that the government was permitted to withhold certain classified information because public disclosure could cause serious damage to national security and (2) specifically precluded defense counsel from inquiring about classified information at trial because the existence or absence of classified information is irrelevant. Nonetheless, in opening statements, counsel for Barrack made statements in direct conflict with those orders, explicitly arguing that the existence or absence of classified information was relevant to the jury’s determination. Counsel made these arguments twice, despite an objection and direction by the Court to move on after the first improper statement. Afterward, the Court issued a measured and appropriate instruction to cure the prejudice caused by counsel’s comments, advising the jury not to speculate about irrelevant information. Barrack’s opening statement was improper, and the curative instruction the Court issued was a necessary response—and remarkably light sanction—for this misconduct. Defendants now seek to avoid the foreseeable consequence of violating the Court’s prior orders prohibiting them from arguing that the existence or non-existence of classified information about intercepted communications suggests that the communications did not exist. In doing so, Defendants signal that they intend to again violate the Court’s orders in closing arguments and also seek an instruction to reverse the remedy the Court was compelled to provide following counsel for Barrack’s calculated decision to make an improper statement. Defendants’ motion should be denied. To the extent"- full 14 page letter on Patreon here.

On October 21, the defense called as a witness Brady Cassis, an associate at Paul Hasting in DC. He was present and took laptop notes at the June 20, 2019 DOJ interview of Barrack. But the US immediately opposed admission of the notes that he took. Judge Brian M. Cogan sent the jurors to the jury room in order to hear argument.

At 3:10 pm, more of Cassis' notes were shown, about Bannon's relationship with MBZ and "Erik Prince / Blackwater;" and a flight to the Middle East including "the actor Rob Lowe." Watch this site.

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