Judge in Maria Butina Case Rips Prosecutors Who Claimed She Offered Sex to Get a Job

Even still, Butina remains held without bond.

A courtroom sketch depicts Maria Butina, a 29-year-old gun rights activist suspected of being a covert Russian agent, during a hearing at the federal courthouse in Washington, DC, on July 18, 2018. Dana Verkouteren/AP Photo

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

A judge rebuked federal prosecutors Monday for falsely alleging that Maria Butina, a Russian national accused of acting as an unregistered foreign agent, had offered sex in exchange for a job—but ruled to leave Butina in prison pending trial.

Prosecutors’ allegation, which they grudgingly retracted in a court filing Friday, “damaged [Butina’s] reputation” and “really makes it very difficult to have a fair trial,” US District Judge Tanya Chutkan said Monday at a hearing on Butina’s effort to secure bail.

Still, Chutkan ruled twice for the government at the hearing. She maintained a prior order that Butina be held without bond, saying defense lawyers had failed to show their client did not pose a flight risk. “I cannot envision any scenario where it is not possible…for Ms. Butina to walk out of jail, be put in a car with diplomatic tags, and taken to an airport,” Chutkan said. She also imposed a gag order on defense attorney Robert Driscoll, barring him from speaking to reporters.

Touting herself as the founder of a Russian gun rights group, Butina worked with Alexander Torshin, a top official at the Russian central bank, to gain access to top levels of the National Rifle Association and the Republican Party in 2015 and 2016. Prosecutors charged her on July 16 with acting as an unregistered agent for Russia. In a July 18 motion arguing she should be held without bond, they alleged that Butina’s relationship with a conservative political activist, identified elsewhere as Paul Erickson, was a cover used by Butina as part of an influence operation. Butina was not really interested in Erickson, the government argued, because she once “offered an individual other than [Erickson] sex in exchange for a position within a special interest organization.” Driscoll, Butina’s lawyer, has repeatedly denounced that allegation, noting prosecutors appeared to misread an exchange with an old friend in Russia in which Butina jokingly offered “sex” to repay a personal favor.

In a motion filed Friday, prosecutors said their reading may have been “mistaken,” but argued Butina nevertheless had no US ties that would prevent her from fleeing.

Chutkan said Monday she was “dismayed” by the prosecutors’ claim. “It took approximately five minutes for me to review those emails and tell that they were jokes,” the judge said. “It was apparent on their face.” The prosecutors representing the government on Monday, assistant US attorneys Thomas Saunders and Erik Kenerson, did not respond to Chutkan’s statements. (The case was brought by prosecutors working separately from special counsel Robert Mueller.)

Chutkan wasn’t just frustrated with government prosecutors at the hearing. She chastised Driscoll for submitting videos as evidence, after the court’s deadline, that intended to show that Butina and Erickson have a legitimate relationship, including a clip of the couple lip-syncing the song “Beauty and the Beast” together. “I am not sure what on the earth [the videos’] relevance is to Ms. Butina’s risk of flight,” Chutkan said.

She also knocked Driscoll for using sensationalized language in court filings. Phrases like “reeks of desperation” to describe government arguments seem aimed at an audience other than the court, the judge said. Chutkan further faulted Driscoll for violating a DC court rule barring lawyers from making statements about the merits of cases outside of court. “Counsel for defense is effectively trying the case in the media,” she said.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest