Two interesting things about U.S. v. Daugerdas, which was the largest tax fraud criminal case in the history of the United States. First, the dishonest juror at issue was a disbarred NY attorney. Second, one of the four defendants did not get a new trial because the judge felt that the defense counsel for this defendant knew about the dishonest juror and failed to raise the issue with the court or opposing counsel until after a guilty verdict was reached. In other words, the trial judge thought defense counsel was "sandbagging" and thus punished the defendant for the actions of his attorneys.
Bloomberg: Juror Lies Trigger New Trial for Three in Tax-Fraud Case
Paul Daugerdas, a former Jenkens & Gilchrist lawyer, and two other defendants in what a judge called the biggest U.S. tax-fraud prosecution in history won a new trial after a juror disclosed she had lied about her past, including that she was an alcoholic and a suspended attorney.
U.S. District Judge William Pauley in Manhattan today overturned the convictions, ruling that the presence of Catherine Conrad, who was Juror No. 1, denied the three a fair trial...to continue reading go here.
Comments