The defense team for former campaign chair Paul Manafort rested its case Tuesday in Alexandria without calling any witnesses in his ongoing bank and tax fraud trial. It is not an unexpected move in white collar cases. In Manafort's case, the defense was choosing between calling several witnesses and potentially revisiting the minutia of a rather incriminating paper trail or simply making the argument that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. They chose the latter.
This keeps the jury from making the mental shift to placing the onus on the defense to prove anything. Plus, putting only a smattering of witnesses on the stand after the prosecution spent 10 days presenting 27 witnesses and numerous documents could seem inherently weak by comparison. Also, presenting witnesses without putting Manafort himself on the stand can plant a seed of doubt in the mind of jurors.
What that leaves for the rest of Tuesday is the judge and lawyers to sit down in a "charging conference" in which they confer about the instructions the judge will issue to the jury the following day.
"That's where they will find out precisely what law Judge Ellis will instruct the jury on," former federal prosecutor Chuck Rosenberg explained on MSNBC.
Then comes closing arguments on Wednesday morning. Each side gets two hours to work with. The prosecution goes first because it has the burden of proof. The defense goes next, and finally the prosecution will get a rebuttal (government lawyers must decide in advance how much of their two hours they want to save for the rebuttal).
Then the jury heads into deliberations.