Court Digest

Washington
Prosecutors ask judge to take steps to protect potential jurors’ identities in 2020 election case
Prosecutors on Tuesday urged the judge overseeing Donald Trump’s election interference case in Washington to take steps to protect the identity of prospective jurors, citing the former president’s “continued use of social media as a weapon of intimidation in court proceedings.”

Special counsel Jack Smith’s team wants U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to issue a written questionnaire to help the two sides choose potential jurors. But it also would give lawyers early access to those people’s identifying information in the case accusing the former Republican president of illegally plotting to overturn his election loss to Democrat Joe Biden.

Prosecutors said in court papers they are concerned about what Trump might do with that information, pointing to his recent disparagement of the clerk of the New York judge overseeing Trump’s civil business fraud trial that caused the judge to issue a limited gag order. Trump posted a photo of Judge Arthur Engoron’s principal law clerk, Allison Greenfield, posing with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., at a public event, writing that it was “disgraceful” that Greenfield was working with the judge in the courtroom.

“Given that the defendant—after apparently reviewing opposition research on court staff—chose to use social media to publicly attack a court staffer, there is cause for concern about what he may do with social media research on potential jurors in this case,” prosecutors in the election interference case wrote.

Smith’s team is asking the court to bar those involved in the case from “following” or “friending” on social media prospective jurors they are doing research on in order to gain access to private pages. They also want the judge to prohibit both sides from using information gained through juror research for any purpose other than jury selection, and require that the sides make sure that anyone who has access to jury materials understands they cannot publicly disclose the information.

“Such a precaution is not only necessary to ensure that all parties handle sensitive juror information responsibly, but also so that the Court can assure prospective and seated jurors in this case that no party will improperly use their names or other identifying information,” prosecutors wrote.

The government’s motion indicates that defense attorneys oppose it. John Lauro, an attorney for Trump, declined to comment on Tuesday.

The request comes as Chutkan considers another request from prosecutors to issue a narrow gag order to bar Trump from making inflammatory and intimidating comments about lawyers, witnesses and other people involved in the proceedings. Chutkan is scheduled to hold arguments on Monday over that request.


New Jersey
Police officials in Paterson sue attorney general
PATERSON, N.J. (AP) — Top Paterson police officials have filed a lawsuit against New Jersey’s attorney general, accusing him of overstepping his authority with the takeover of the police department in the state’s third-largest city.

Attorney General Matthew Platkin put the 300-plus officer Paterson police department under state supervision in March, less than a month after officers there shot and killed a well-known crisis intervention worker during a tense standoff. Platkin didn’t mention the shooting of 31-year-old Najee Seabrooks but cited a “crisis of confidence in law enforcement” as the office had assumed control of all police functions, including the division that investigates internal police matters.

While New Jersey’s constitution gives the state attorney general direct supervision of county prosecutors and police chiefs, Paterson’s police chief and acting police director argue in a complaint filed in Passaic County Superior Court that the state takeover “exceeds the bounds of their statutory and constitutional authority,” NJ.com reported.

Platkin spokesperson Sharon Lauchaire called the suit “as unfortunate as it is meritless,” telling NJ.com in an email that the attorney general’s authority to supersede local law enforcement agencies “is well established — and given the history in Paterson, the need to do so was clear.”

The attorney general’s office has been involved in a handful of investigations in the city of more than 150,000 that’s roughly 20 miles (32 kilometers) northwest of New York. In February, Platkin announced an aggravated assault charge against a Paterson officer who he said shot a fleeing unarmed man. In December, a grand jury declined to indict Paterson police officers involved in the death of a man they restrained two months earlier.

Mayor Andre Sayegh, although not a plaintiff in the lawsuit, on Monday called himself an “interested party,” and said his office needs to know if the attorney general’s takeover was allowed under state law.

Sayegh also said officials had been making “dramatic changes” to the department, but their implementation of “serious and meaningful change” had been interrupted by the takeover. He said he had fired one police chief, but the chief’s replacement had only a few weeks to work on the issues before he was sidelined by the state.

State officials contend that the takeover is working, citing a significant decline in violent crime last summer compared to the summer before.


Washington
Officers’ lawyers challenge analysis of video showing Black man’s death
TACOMA, Wash. (AP) — Lawyers for three police officers charged in the death of Manny Ellis on Thursday challenged a forensic video analyst’s interpretation of videos shot by witnesses that show the Black man’s fatal arrest in Tacoma, Washington.

Later in the afternoon, Ellis’ sister, Monét Carter-Mixon, said weeks went by after his death and she still didn’t know what happened, so she took to social media to try to learn the truth. That’s how she connected with one of the witnesses who took video of the incident.

Tacoma Officers Matthew Collins and Christopher Burbank, both white, are charged with second-degree murder and manslaughter in the death of Ellis on March 3, 2020. Officer Timothy Rankine, who is Asian American, is charged with manslaughter. All three have pleaded not guilty.

Video evidence is key in the case against the officers. The officers say Ellis was violent toward them during the encounter, but the videos and witness statements indicate he didn’t fight back.

On Wednesday, forensic video analyst Grant Fredericks walked the jury through one of the videos, frame by frame. It shows Collins on the ground behind Ellis with his hands near his neck, and Burbank aiming his Taser at Ellis’ chest.

As Ellis holds his hands in the air in a posture indicating surrender, Burbank fires the Taser and Collins puts his arm around Ellis’ neck in a chokehold. Ellis’ head falls to the ground, and he stops moving.

On Thursday, attorney Jared Ausserer, representing Collins, said the video shows Ellis did not follow the officers’ repeated commands.

“Collins could be heard saying put your hands behind your back,” Ausserer said. “At no point does he put his hands behind his back.”

Fredericks disagreed. “He put his hand behind his back. The video shows it,” he said.

As they played portions of the video over and over, Ausserer said it appeared that Ellis “dragged” Burbank down to the ground when he shifted his hips, but Fredericks said the video suggests that Burbank simply lost his balance.

When prosecutors played one of the videos on Wednesday showing Collins holding Ellis on the ground and Ellis screaming as he was shocked with the Taser, sobs could be heard from the side of the courtroom where Ellis’ family and supporters were seated.

They also played video from a doorbell security camera from a home across the street. The camera captures Ellis’s pleas: “Can’t breathe, sir, Can’t breathe.”

This is the first trial under a five-year-old Washington state law designed to make it easier to prosecute police who wrongfully use deadly force.

New York
Star witness starts testimony at FTX founder’s trial
NEW YORK (AP) — The trial of FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried took a star turn Tuesday as his former fellow top executive, Caroline Ellison, began testifying against him, immediately blaming her former boyfriend for directing her to commit crimes before his cryptocurrency empire collapsed last November.

Ellison’s highly anticipated turn on the witness stand in Manhattan federal court took place just moments before the trial broke for lunch.

When she was asked to identify Bankman-Fried in the courtroom, Ellison stood at the witness stand as she scanned the courtroom for a long minute, at first unable to find him, before gesturing his way with a flip of her hand and saying he was “over there wearing a suit.”

Bankman-Fried’s appearance has changed dramatically in recent months as he has lost weight and trimmed his well-known wild coif into a tightly cropped look more traditional in the world of finance.

In the trial’s second week, Ellison said she committed fraud, conspiracy to commit fraud and money laundering along with Bankman-Fried and others.

Asked by a prosecutor about Bankman-Fried’s involvement, she said: “He directed me to commit these crimes.”

Bankman-Fried could face decades in prison if he is convicted of charges lodged against him when he was brought to the United States from the Bahamas last December. He has pleaded not guilty.

Bankman-Fried, 31, was one of the world’s wealthiest people on paper, with an estimated net worth of $32 billion, when his cryptocurrency businesses collapsed as investors and customers sought to empty their accounts last November. Bankruptcy proceedings followed as prosecutors alleged that stolen funds were used to fund his businesses, make donations and contribute to political campaigns in the hopes of influencing cryptocurrency regulation in Washington.

Ellison testified under a cooperation deal that could win her leniency when she is sentenced. It could also be pivotal when the jury decides whether Bankman-Fried is guilty of fraud charges among seven counts in an indictment against him.

Bankman-Fried has been jailed since August, when Judge Lewis A. Kaplan concluded that he had tried to influence Ellison and other potential trial witnesses and could no longer be trusted to await trial under a $250 million bond and confinement to his parent’s Palo Alto, California, home.

As Ellison testified, several of her friends or online fans were in attendance at the courthouse. In an overflow courtroom where spectators could watch proceedings on a television monitor, some of them, smiles on their faces, rushed toward a screen to see her up close.

Ellison seemed composed, answering questions posed by Assistant U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon.

At the outset, Sassoon asked her how she knew the defendant. She said she met him at Jane Street, a hedge fund, where she worked as an intern before joining his company after he formed Alameda Research in 2017.

She then volunteered that they had “dated a couple years.”

Eventually, Bankman-Fried installed Ellison as chief executive at Alameda.

Ellison said Bankman-Fried set up systems that enabled Alameda to withdraw unlimited sums of money from FTX accounts and he “directed us to take FTX money to repay our loans.”

She said Alameda eventually withdrew up to $14 billion from FTX, although some of it was paid back.

Ellison’s testimony immediately followed two days of testimony from Gary Wang, an FTX cofounder and another key figure in Bankman-Fried’s inner circle. He also testified under a plea agreement with prosecutors that he was directed by the defendant to set up software loopholes that allowed Alameda to drain FTX accounts of unlimited funds.