Manafort Trial Day 8: We don't know much about who is up next on the stand. The govt said they anticipated 8 more witnesses, and expected to still be done with their case in chief by the end of the week. Stay tuned. On what went down yesterday: buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetil…
Prosecutors just filed a motion for a "curative instruction" — yesterday, in front of the jury, the judge had gotten upset that a govt witness sat in on the trial, which the judge said he usually did not permit. But the govt said the judge prev. okay'd it scribd.com/document/38581… 
There have been a number of tense exchanges between the judge and prosecutors — some in front of the jury, some not — but this is the first time the govt has asked for an instruction like this. They argue the court incorrectly suggested to the jury the govt "acted improperly"
During this exchange yesterday, the prosecutor told the judge he had granted permission earlier and that the transcript would show that. The judge had still gotten upset and told the govt not to do it again. In today's motion, they attached the segment of that transcript
Heading into the courtroom now, we'll see how the judge responds. Stay tuned.
Out for morning recess. Updates so far:
- When the jury came in, judge addressed his criticism of the govt yesterday for having an expert witness sit in on the trial. Judge said he hadn't reviewed the transcript yet, but was "probably wrong" and told the jury to "put that aside"
- When the jury came in, judge addressed his criticism of the govt yesterday for having an expert witness sit in on the trial. Judge said he hadn't reviewed the transcript yet, but was "probably wrong" and told the jury to "put that aside"
First witness up is Melinda James (prev. Melinda Francis), who worked for Citizens Bank when Paul Manafort was applying for loans. This is getting into testimony on the bank fraud charges Manafort faces — those carry max penalties of 30 years, the most serious of all the charges
Manafort had applied for loans from Citizens Bank, James testified, incl. two totalling $3.4M against a property Manafort owned at 29 Howard St. in NYC. They were basically loans against the equity in the property
Deleted the tweet screenshotted, I mixed up the properties. The govt alleges Manafort lied in his bank loan app by 1. falsely representing 29 Howard St. (not 377 Union) was being used as a residence when it was a rental and 2. false representing 377 Union St. had no mortgage
The govt also alleges that Manafort's misrepresentations about his income in his taxes, which he's separately charged with, also carried over into the bank loan issue
Via witness Melinda James, the govt introduced copies of bank loan application docs that showed pages that Manafort signed saying 29 Howard St. was a residence. James said she found it online listed as a rental, and alerted her boss
The jury then saw an email from James' boss to Manafort, saying that Manafort's (now-former) son-in-law Jeff Yohai had taken care of the rental listing issue. Did James know how that was resolved, prosecutor asked James. No, she said
The jury also saw emails and documents about insurance declarations submitted to Citizens Bank, which Melinda James said were needed to indicate if other properties Manafort owned had mortgages on them (the bank needed to know about any debts, she said)
There was an insurance declaration listed as being effective Feb. 2016 that indicated a mortgage on the 377 Union St. property. James emailed Rick Gates, with Manafort cc'd, asking about this, since it had prev. been represented as having no mortgage
There was an email from Manafort to James saying he had been approved for a mortgage for 377, but James said this didn't necessarily mean he had gotten that money. She then got an email from Gates with an insurance declaration stating 377 Union did not have a mortgage
That insurance declaration was listed as effective 10/2015. Prosecutor asked James if she noticed the difference in dates, that what she received from Gates (w/ Manafort cc'd) was older than the declaration listing a mortgage. James said she didn't recognize that at the time
We're just getting into cross examination by Manafort lawyer Jay Nanavati. His Qs so far are about the fluidity of the mortgage application process, and how info submitted earlier in the process could be different from the status of Manafort's properties at closing on the loans
Back to court, stay tuned.
Lunch break. Manafort's lawyer Jay Nanavati finished cross of the Citizens Bank employee who handled docs for his loan app. Overarching Qs at issue with this testimony: Did Manafort lie about how the 29 Howard St. property was used, and about a mortgage on 377 Union St property
Nanavati read the jury a stipulation between the parties that a mortgage *was* executed on the 377 Union St. property on 2/9/16. So no one disputes there was a $5.3M mortgage. On the final loan app for 29 Howard St., signed 3/4/16, it says no mortgage on 377 Union St.
The gist of the defense questioning was that it was Rick Gates' fault that the bank received documents indicating there was no mortgage. Nanavati asked witness Melinda James about emails from Manafort saying he would send over the insurance docs she needed
Manafort told James on 2/24/16 that a mortgage was approved for 377. James thanked him. She then got a call from Gates — there was confusion about what he said. Nanavati asked if he told her the mortgage was paid; James said Gates said they decided not to go ahead w/ the mortgage
After that call, Gates sent an email to James, with Manafort cc'd, with the older insurance policy reflecting there was no mortgage on 377. Nanavati to James: Fair to say things "went off the rails" with Gates call? Yes, James said.
Re: whether Manafort falsely represented 29 Howard St. was a residence, versus a rental, Nanavati about an email from a bank official saying Manafort's son-in-law Jeff Yohai was taking care of the rental issue. Did James know if Manafort knew it was being rented? No, she said
Manafort was cc'd on the email that Gates sent to James with the older insurance policy attached — did James know if Manafort opened that and read the document? She said she did not
On re-direct, prosecutor Uzo Asonye also asked about that email where Manafort was cc'd with the older insurance policy attached — did the subject line state there were no mortgages on the 377 Union St property? Yes, James said
Asonye asked James if Manafort could have noted the $5.3 million mortgage on the 377 Union St. property when he signed the final loan papers for the 29 Howard St. reficinancing loan on 3/4/16. James said yes. Did Gates get any money from that refinancing? No, she said
Re: rental v. residence issue: Asonye introduced an email from Manafort to Jeff Yohai saying that an appointment with an appraiser for 29 Howard St. was being made, and to "remember" that the appraiser "believes" Yohai and Jessica Manafort are living at the property
Before lunch, we heard from Darin Evenson, a former Navy SEAL who is director of customer experience for Airbnb. We saw records about when 29 Howard St. was listed for rent between Jan. 2015 and April 2016. There were multiple reservations in the system, Evenson said
The entire property was listed for rent via Airbnb, as opposed to a room within the property, Evenson said. The records showed the listing was removed from the site from 10/27/15-11/20/15, and from 2/26/18-3/26/16 (that included when the loan was being finalized)
Evenson said he didn't have a record of Paul Manafort being part of the Airbnb listing. The account name was Jeff Yohai (Manafort's former son-in-law). We previously heard that the corporate entity that owned 29 Howard St. was owned by Manafort, his wife, and his daughter
After lunch, we'll hear defense cross of the Airbnb witness. We haven't heard who is next. Govt still expects to finish its case in chief tomorrow. Judge said Manafort's lawyers should be prepared to say at that point if they plan to present evidence (Manafort doesn't have to)
On a quick p.m. break. The cross of the Airbnb witness was short. Defense lawyer Jay Nanavati asks if many Airbnb hosts rent out their primary residence. Witness said yes. Asked how many days the 29 Howard St. property was rented, witness said he did not know
Next we heard from Peggy Miceli, an underwriting exec at Citizens Bank who worked on the Manafort loan re: 29 Howard St. We heard about the difference in loan options for residences v. rentals: If property is a rental, witness said max loan is $1M. Manafort got a $3.4M loan
We saw a lot of the same emails/docs we've seen before about Manafort's loan application, and there were a lot of similar Qs about what information the bank would have wanted to know about re: Manafort's assets and liabilities
On cross examination, defense lawyer Jay Nanavati asked the underwriter witness if she knew about emails between Manafort and another bank employee we prev. heard from, Melinda James, where Manafort said he was approved for a mortgage on the 377 property. She said no
Miceli was also asked if she knew about one version of the insurance docs submitted that indicated the mortgage on the 377 property (Rick Gates later sent an older version that indicated no mortgage). She said no.
Up next: Govt listed two witnesses, both appear to be re: the bank fraud allegations — Taryn Rodriguez and Gary Seferian (reportedly of Citizens Bank and Banc of California, respectively — see this helpful piece from @Tierney_Megan talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/muel…)
Done for the day. More in a bit, but we heard from the two other bank witnesses. Taryn Rodriguez of Citizens Bank talked about a $5.5M construction loan that Manafort sought for his property at 377 Union St. in NY, but didn't ultimately get (she said she wasn't told why)
Rodriguez testified that info on the initial loan app she prepared, which was based on loan info from the earlier 29 Howard St. loan, didn't incl. the $3.4M mortgage on 377 Union, which she said she found in a property search. Said Manafort also didn't disclose another $1M loan
During that testimoney, prosecutors reintroduced earlier evidence that they allege shows Manafort orchestrated a phony loan forgiveness between two entities he controlled to make it seem like he had more income in applying for loans
We also heard from Gary Seferian, a bank exec at Banc of California. Manafort had applied for a $5M commercial loan to flip houses in LA, came away with a $1M loan. Seferian testified about how the loan amount dropped the more they learned about Manafort's assets and income
Seferian also said they relied on a financial doc showing $4.4M in income to Manafort's biz in 2015 that prosecutors say falsely inflated the income. If the income had been what prosecutors say was the right amount, the bank exec said Manafort prob wouldn't have gotten the loan
Day 8: The judge in Paul Manafort's trial keeps criticizing prosecutors in front of the jury. Things came to a head today, with the government asking the judge to tell the jury he was wrong to do so on one occasion (and he did, sort of) buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetil…
