Donald Trump indicted by Manhattan grand jury

[BPPLEE]

 

[RocksInMyHead]

I did one time. The judge had just ruled that it wasn’t a crime.

There are plenty of things that can get you a Contempt charge that aren't actual crimes. The bottom line is that a judge has broad authority when it comes to setting the rules of behavior in his or her courtroom - as I'm sure you know very well.

 

[BPPLEE]

There are plenty of things that can get you a Contempt charge that aren't actual crimes. The bottom line is that a judge has broad authority when it comes to setting the rules of behavior in his or her courtroom - as I'm sure you know very well.

All that happened in my case is that court was dismissed for the day because everyone in the courtroom was laughing

 

[RocksInMyHead]

All that happened in my case is that court was dismissed for the day because everyone in the courtroom was laughing

Good for you I guess? But that just means that your judge in that case happened to be a good sport. He could have tossed you out or threatened you with a contempt charge if you did it again, right?

752. General Definition of Contempt

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact webmaster@usdoj.gov if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

To clarify - you definitely have the constitutional right to roll your eyes at a judge or flip him the bird. But the judge has the constitutional right to tell you that you can't do that in his courtroom - and the constitutional authority to enforce that decree.

 

[BPPLEE]

Good for you I guess? But that just means that your judge in that case happened to be a good sport. He could have tossed you out or threatened you with a contempt charge if you did it again, right?

752. General Definition of Contempt

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact webmaster@usdoj.gov if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

To clarify - you definitely have the constitutional right to roll your eyes at a judge or flip him the bird. But the judge has the constitutional right to tell you that you can't do that in his courtroom - and the constitutional authority to enforce that decree.

He ruled that someone could flip me off and there was nothing I could do about it. I said have a nice day your honor and did the same thing to him.
He would have looked like a hypocrite to hold me in contempt.
He didn’t hold it against me. He moved on.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

He ruled that someone could flip me off and there was nothing I could do about it. I said have a nice day your honor and did the same thing to him.
He would have looked like a hypocrite to hold me in contempt.
He didn’t hold it against me. He moved on.

I'm not sure what you're trying to demonstrate here. The fact that a judge chose not to remonstrate you for flipping him off does not mean that a different judge had no right to remonstrate a different individual for being disrespectful in the courtroom and violating the rules of procedure (including interrupting the judge, demanding that testimony be struck, and rolling his eyes at the judge).

 

[BPPLEE]

I'm not sure what you're trying to demonstrate here. The fact that a judge chose not to remonstrate you for flipping him off does not mean that a different judge had no right to remonstrate a different individual for being disrespectful in the courtroom and violating the rules of procedure (including interrupting the judge, demanding that testimony be struck, and rolling his eyes at the judge).

Just talking about an experience I had. It has no relevance to Trump’s trial.
What is concerning is the judge’s instruction to the jury that they don’t have to be unanimous as to what crime Trump was trying to cover up.
There is no way to prepare a defense for a crime that is not specified and the 6th Amendment gives defendants the right to know what they are accused of.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

What is concerning is the judge’s instruction to the jury that they don’t have to be unanimous as to what crime Trump was trying to cover up.
There is no way to prepare a defense for a crime that is not specified and the 6th Amendment gives defendants the right to know what they are accused of.

The crime(s) are specified though. The prosecution made the case for three different crimes that Trump was attempting to cover up:

1. Violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act
2. Falsification of other business records.
3. Tax law violations

Since he's not being charged with any of these crimes directly, there's no need for the jury to unanimously decide that he committed any or all of them - just that they all agree that he did at least one of these three things.

False right-wing reports about Trump trial jury instructions fuel threats against judge

False reporting and social media commentary about the jury instructions in Trump's hush money trial have spurred calls for the assassination of the judge overseeing the case.

www.nbcnews.com

Posts misrepresent New York judge’s instructions to jury in Trump hush money trial

As jury deliberations began Wednesday in Trump’s trial, social media users spread false information about Merchan’s instructions to the seven men and five women who will determine the outcome in the first criminal trial of a former U.S. president.

apnews.com

ETA:

Prosecutors are required to prove two elements for each of the counts in order to find Trump guilty, Judge Merchan told the jurors.

They must find that he “personally or by acting in concert with another person or persons made or caused a false entry in the records” or a business. Prosecutors must also prove that Trump did so with the intent to commit or conceal another crime.

Prosecutors allege the other crime that Trump intended to commit or conceal was a violation of a state election law regarding a conspiracy to promote or prevent an election by unlawful means.

The alleged unlawful means that jurors must consider are:

• Violations of federal campaign finance law
• Falsifying other business records, such as paperwork used to establish the bank account used to pay Stormy Daniels, bank records and tax forms
• Violation of city, state and federal tax laws, including by providing false or fraudulent information on tax returns, “even if it does not result in underpayment of taxes”

Donald Trump's hush money trial: Highlights from first day of jury deliberations

Jury deliberations began Wednesday in Donald Trump’s hush money trial, placing the outcome of the history-making case in the hands of a dozen New Yorkers who have vowed to be fair and impartial in the face of their unprecedented task.

apnews.com

 

[rambot]

Just talking about an experience I had. It has no relevance to Trump’s trial.
What is concerning is the judge’s instruction to the jury that they don’t have to be unanimous as to what crime Trump was trying to cover up.
There is no way to prepare a defense for a crime that is not specified and the 6th Amendment gives defendants the right to know what they are accused of.

Pretty sure all the crimes were specified.

 

[BPPLEE]

The crime(s) are specified though. The prosecution made the case for three different crimes that Trump was attempting to cover up:

1. Violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act
2. Falsification of other business records.
3. Tax law violations

Since he's not being charged with any of these crimes directly, there's no need for the jury to unanimously decide that he committed any or all of them - just that they all agree that he did at least one of these three things.

False right-wing reports about Trump trial jury instructions fuel threats against judge

False reporting and social media commentary about the jury instructions in Trump's hush money trial have spurred calls for the assassination of the judge overseeing the case.

www.nbcnews.com

Posts misrepresent New York judge’s instructions to jury in Trump hush money trial

As jury deliberations began Wednesday in Trump’s trial, social media users spread false information about Merchan’s instructions to the seven men and five women who will determine the outcome in the first criminal trial of a former U.S. president.

apnews.com

Looks like reversible error to me. You can’t pick a crime like a menu item. If the jury can’t agree on which crime was being covered up there shouldn’t be a conviction

 

[BPPLEE]

Pretty sure all the crimes were specified.

It’s pick and choose any one of three, and the jury has been instructed that they don’t have to agree which one

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Looks like reversible error to me. You can’t pick a crime like a menu item. If the jury can’t agree on which crime was being covered up there shouldn’t be a conviction

To clarify, the specific law that the prosecution claims was violated (and was being covered up) is a New York state law that prohibits conspiracy to promote or prevent an election by "unlawful means". The law does not specify what those "unlawful means" must be or that they be a crime for which the defendant has been previously convicted, so the jury is not required to agree on what they are.

I agree, it's not particularly straightforward, but it is the law.

 

[NxNW]

It’s pick and choose any one of three, and the jury has been instructed that they don’t have to agree which one

Sounds like freedom to me.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

The full jury instructions can be read here: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24703898/donald-trump-hush-money-trial-jury-instructions.pdf

 

[wing2000]

To clarify, the specific law that the prosecution claims was violated (and was being covered up) is a New York state law that prohibits conspiracy to promote or prevent an election by "unlawful means". The law does not specify what those "unlawful means" must be or that they be a crime for which the defendant has been previously convicted, so the jury is not required to agree on what they are.

I agree, it's not particularly straightforward, but it is the law.

Yea, that part of the NY state law struck me as odd when I first heard....and it seems some media are misrepresenting it. In any case, it is the law.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Verdict reached!

 

[iluvatar5150]

AAAAAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAA

 

[iluvatar5150]

 

[BPPLEE]

Verdict reached!

Guilty, appeal coming

 

[Elliewaves]

Aw, it's his first perfect score in something!