# A Thread for the Mueller Investigation Results and Outcomes (Part 1) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 28, 2017, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093 "2017-10-28T20:14:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 322
**Author:** ![psychobunny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/54ee81/32.png) [@psychobunny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychobunny)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2018, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6422 "2018-08-16T17:28:44Z")
> [@](#): > > Lastly, the “CFI effect” is a real thing. Help me out here. What is the CFI effect? ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2018, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6423 "2018-08-16T17:30:23Z")
> [@Aspenglow](#): > > Lastly, the “CFI effect” is a real thing. Complete Fucking Idiot Effect? ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2018, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6424 "2018-08-16T17:35:52Z")
I suspect she means the “[CSI Effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSI_effect)”, i.e. the tendency of jurors to judge evidence by the (unrealistic) standards that they’ve seen on TV shows. [Confusing an “F” and “S” is extremely common for people who hear things over the phone, since phones don’t distinguish between those sounds. Not so common for people reading, though.] ---
**Author:** ![Crotalus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crotalus/32/41_2.png) [@Crotalus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crotalus)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2018, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6425 "2018-08-16T17:36:42Z")
I think **Aspenglow** meant CSU effect, where juries expect a bunch of 100% certain science about every damned detail of evidence. ninja’d again ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2018, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6426 "2018-08-16T17:44:05Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > Lance Ito rides again? I don’t think it was the publicity of the trial that got to Ellis, as in Ito’s case. I think he’d just gotten into the rather sloppy habit of messing with the lawyers as a way to amuse himself during trials. Not wanting to be the proverbial “potted plant.” And I am sure he is, for the most part, a good and fair jurist – has probably taught a lot of lawyers a lot of important things. In fact, it likely was the publicity that brought his bad habit to his attention. He made a comment to the lawyers outside the presence of the jury (I believe they were discussing jury instructions) during the final days of the trial that made it clear he was following what the press was saying about him and his rulings. Judges really are the rulers of their own courtrooms with little oversight, and each courtroom evolves its own culture. Some are known as liberal, some very hard on the lawyers, some are called the “second prosecutor in the courtroom.” Still others become known for amusing themselves at the lawyers’ expense. Sometimes those cultures get a little out of hand. That’s what I believe happened here. To Judge Ellis’s credit, he did recognize the problem and took appropriate remedial steps. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2018, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6427 "2018-08-16T17:49:02Z")
> [@psychobunny](#): > > Help me out here. What is the CFI effect? I’m sorry. I did mean CSI, CFI. There are reasons why CFI is a common typo I make. > [@Derleth](#): > > Complete Fucking Idiot Effect? I like it. 😃 But probably not the case with Judge Ellis. > [@Crotalus](#): > > I think **Aspenglow** meant CSU effect, \*\*where juries expect a bunch of 100% certain science about every damned detail of evidence. > \*\* > ninja’d again Exactly. They want DNA evidence for every rape case, e.g. Not always available. Also the misunderstanding that circumstantial evidence is not as important as direct evidence. In the eyes of the law, both are equally persuasive. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2018, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6428 "2018-08-16T22:33:30Z")
> [@Aspenglow](#): > > Really? Seen a lot of cases where parties filed motions for curative instructions based on judicial error, have you? I haven’t. Sat through a fuckload of criminal trials, too. > > Judge must have agreed, since he granted them. Even he realized he’d overstepped. Lots of former US attorneys who had tried cases in front of him also agreed. > > I’ll allow he seemed to settle down with his antics quite a lot after the prosecutors yanked his leash. > > I never thought he was actively working to throw the case to the defense. He just enjoys fucking with people. He strikes me as one of those judges who’s a little past his “use-by” date. Probably should have taken retirement more than a few years ago, but nothing in retirement sounds more fun than playing in the little fiefdom he now occupies on the T. S. Ellis Show. I knew more than a few of those. > > **septimus** , re the Manafort verdict, the jury may hang on a few of the charges, namely the 4 counts of bank fraud. The path to Manafort’s conviction on those charges is a little more iffy because the president of the bank, Stephen Calk, appears to have entered into a quid pro quo arrangement with Manafort to take a job inside the Trump administration in exchange for the 16 million dollars’ worth of loans Manafort received. So there is some question about who actually committed the fraud: Manafort or Calk? Personally, I think Manfort’s intent to defraud is clear, but the jury may see it in a different way. > > Other than that, the prosecution’s case is as strong as they get, the judge’s rulings and instructions (if not his open court commentary) were sound and if the jury follows their instructions, they should have no problem in rendering guilty verdicts. > > But I will mention that in my experience, the primary area where trials go off the rails is due to juror misconduct. Sometimes a juror wants to “send a message.” More often, the jury is trying hard to do its job, but the complexity of the trial outstrips their ability to understand their role. Lastly, the “CFI effect” is a real thing. > > Jurors almost always try very hard to do their job honorably and well. I hope this is such a case. That said, the kerfuffle on the day before closing arguments is likely a juror misconduct issue. Let’s hope the judge made the correct ruling to let the trial go forward without replacing a juror (if it was only one juror). This will surely be an issue on appeal. Saw that happen more than once, too – along with remands for retrial from the higher court. > > Not something I bet on, I’m afraid. Sometimes jury’s verdicts made me wonder if we even sat through the same trial. Not a lawyer, but this seems like the most valid analysis I’ve read in a while. I think Manafort’s guilty as sin, and I’m guessing that most of the jurors see it that was as well. But it takes just one lone juror to royally fuck things up. I remember I used to know a civil trial lawyer and I expressed my skepticism over juries, believing that they could easily be suckered and wrongly convict people. While he acknowledged the gullibility of jurors, he said no matter what, he always wanted a jury. If he could just convince one that there was any doubt… Touching on a point that’s been discussed here already, I remember Marcia Clark of O. J. Simpson trial fame remarked a few years back (think it was during the Zimmerman case) that many jurors get confused about “reasonable” doubt. Beyond all “reasonable” doubt doesn’t mean that the prosecution has to prove something with 100% certainty. In theory there might possibly be other explanations for certain evidence during a trial, but jurors shouldn’t be required to perform mental gymnastics to explain away evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Chisquirrel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6bbea6/32.png) [@Chisquirrel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chisquirrel)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2018, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6429 "2018-08-16T23:57:12Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Squirrel is dead, also moose. The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated. ---
**Author:** ![steatopygia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steatopygia/32/3132_2.png) [@steatopygia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steatopygia)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2018, 6:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6430 "2018-08-17T06:42:55Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > Not a lawyer, but this seems like the most valid analysis I’ve read in a while. I think Manafort’s guilty as sin, and I’m guessing that most of the jurors see it that was as well. But it takes just one lone juror to royally fuck things up. > > I remember I used to know a civil trial lawyer and I expressed my skepticism over juries, believing that they could easily be suckered and wrongly convict people. While he acknowledged the gullibility of jurors, he said no matter what, he always wanted a jury. If he could just convince one that there was any doubt… > > Touching on a point that’s been discussed here already, I remember Marcia Clark of O. J. Simpson trial fame remarked a few years back (think it was during the Zimmerman case) that many jurors get confused about “reasonable” doubt. Beyond all “reasonable” doubt doesn’t mean that the prosecution has to prove something with 100% certainty. In theory there might possibly be other explanations for certain evidence during a trial, but jurors shouldn’t be required to perform mental gymnastics to explain away evidence. Unless I have my timeline wrong, you might have been a little prescient here. Looks like the jurors might be “performing mental gymnastics to explain away evidence”. [WaPo article](https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/jury-begins-deliberations-in-paul-manaforts-tax--and-bank-fraud-trial/2018/08/16/d2b0f486-a170-11e8-8e87-c869fe70a721_story.html?utm_term=.597ec1c9dd57) stating that the jurors have sent several questions to the judge including the definition of beyond reasonable doubt. I don’t know why I would worry. I’m sure I’ll wake up tomorrow and all will be right with the world. ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2018, 10:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6431 "2018-08-17T10:13:42Z")
The jury asked for the definition of ‘reasonable doubt’, and asked about the definition of shelf companies - which IIRC is important because companies that own a foreign bank account might be required to disclose it, but only people owning 51% of the company don’t have to file; I think Manafort owned exactly 50% of the consulting business (somehow I doubt that figure is a coincidence). The jury is going to acquit on all counts because of ‘reasonable doubt’ since they can come up with some half-assed plausible explanation for all the evidence. Not guilty on all counts. You heard it here first. ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2018, 10:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6432 "2018-08-17T10:21:43Z")
And really - after O.J. Simpson, George Zimmerman and Casey Anthony, should we really be surprised that any jury can get it totally, completely fucking wrong? ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2018, 10:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6433 "2018-08-17T10:54:08Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > Not guilty on all counts. You heard it here first. Would you care to make it interesting? ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2018, 11:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6434 "2018-08-17T11:11:32Z")
> [@friedo](#): > > Would you care to make it interesting? I’ll pay $100 to your charity of choice if guilty on all counts, you pay $100 to my charity of choice if not guilty on all counts, and if it’s guilty on some not guilty on others it’s a push? ---
**Author:** ![ThelmaLou](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thelmalou/32/390_2.png) [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2018, 11:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6435 "2018-08-17T11:30:15Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > … > The jury is going to acquit on all counts because of ‘reasonable doubt’ since they can come up with some half-assed plausible explanation for all the evidence. > > Not guilty on all counts. You heard it here first. Sadly, I have to agree with you. ☹ ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2018, 11:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6436 "2018-08-17T11:49:21Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > I’ll pay $100 to your charity of choice if guilty on all counts, you pay $100 to my charity of choice if not guilty on all counts, and if it’s guilty on some not guilty on others it’s a push? Hmm, I don’t know if I would bet on guilty on _all_ counts. I do think there’s a reasonable chance that he may be acquitted on some. How about: - I win if he’s convicted on a majority (10+) of the 18 counts; - you win if he’s acquitted on a majority (10+) of the 18 counts; - it’s a push if neither convictions nor acquittals add up to a majority. I agree to the terms of a hundo buckaroos. ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2018, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6437 "2018-08-17T11:53:43Z")
> [@friedo](#): > > Hmm, I don’t know if I would bet on guilty on _all_ counts. I do think there’s a reasonable chance that he may be acquitted on some. How about: > > - I win if he’s convicted on a majority (10+) of the 18 counts; > - you win if he’s acquitted on a majority (10+) of the 18 counts; > - it’s a push if neither convictions nor acquittals add up to a majority. > > I agree to the terms of a hundo buckaroos. I can live with that. And perhaps we could triple the payout if he’s guilty (or acquitted) of all charges - something I would be very very happy to lose… ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2018, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6438 "2018-08-17T12:43:30Z")
It doesn’t take much for one Trumpist to sneak onto a jury. Of course, Manafort has another trial coming. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2018, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6439 "2018-08-17T12:52:10Z")
The jury asking about the definition of “reasonable doubt” looks like a non-story, to me. I’d be surprised if there’s any jury trial where that’s not asked by some juror or another. Heck, I’ve asked it myself many times (though never from a jury box), and never once gotten a straight answer. ---
**Author:** ![Turek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/turek/32/18782_2.png) [@Turek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Turek)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2018, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6440 "2018-08-17T13:09:32Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > The jury asking about the definition of “reasonable doubt” looks like a non-story, to me. I’d be surprised if there’s any jury trial where that’s not asked by some juror or another. Heck, I’ve asked it myself many times (though never from a jury box), and never once gotten a straight answer. Chuck Rosenberg, who served as the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, told Rachel Maddow last night that that is a very common question, probably the one juries ask more than any other. ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2018, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/6441 "2018-08-17T13:26:26Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > I can live with that. And perhaps we could triple the payout if he’s guilty (or acquitted) of all charges - something I would be very very happy to lose… You got a deal. I await the verdict with bated breath. This is almost as fun as five dollar blackjack. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093.md?page=321) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093.md?page=323)