Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Being not even an amateur atty, you are easilyThis was a fair trial, except …
I really haven’t been paying attention. If I had and I were a professional attorney, I might be able to compile more arguments why this will be vacated upon appeal. Those involved should be disbarred and convicted themselves.
- There Was No Crime.
- Paying someone not to talk is not a crime.
- Statute Of Limitations Expired.
- Even if there was a crime.
- Prosecutorial Abuse of Power/Overcharging.
- The allegation of business misrepresentations is, at most, a mistake. It should be handled in a civil case, if not merely a misdemeanor.
- The rationalization of multiple counts (34) is based on campaign financing reporting, not repeated incidents of a crime.
- Prosecutorial Abuse of Power/Undercharging.
- Campaign finance reporting was made, in part, due to Prosecutors Witness, (Cohen) who testified he stole $50,000.00 from Defendant.
- Not only, was he not charged, this makes Defendant the victim in the proceeding.
- Judge Refused Change Of Venue.
- Defendant is political opponent and the district the prosecutor filed charges had the highest % of votes against him in the 2020 election.
- It is not reasonable to expect a fair trial with a jury of his peers.
- Judge Refused To Recuse Himself.
- Judge and daughter of judge were donors to the Defendant’s political opponent.
- Violation of 1st Amendment. Gag Order
- Defendant was repeatedly punished for publicly pointing out the political motivations of the officers of the court.
- His 1st Amendment rights were deprived when he needed them most – when he was at risk of losing life, liberty and property at the hands of a tyrannical State.
- Violation of 6th Amendment:
- Charge was not specified. It is impossible to defend against an unspecified charge.
- Violation of 8th Amendment:
- Excessive punishment. 4 years in jail per count is a life sentence for a non-crime, a misdemeanor, at most. Such punishment is not merely cruel and unusual, it’s unheard of and unprecedented.
- Defense Not Allowed To Bring Witnesses.
- FEC Commissioner would have explained what a campaign contribution is and what it is not. This expert witness would destroy one of the elements of the complaint.
- Another witness would have not corroborated lying witnesses’ testimony.
- Judge Failed To Dismiss Case With Grounds.
- Prosecutions witness lied, leaving Defendant with no credible witnesses against him.
- Improper Jury Instructions
- Normally, jury instructions are about 5 pages and written copies given to the jury.
- In this case, the jury instructions were 54 pages and only provided to the jury verbally.
- Judge specifically told jury that certain pieces of evidence could be considered sufficient to convict.
- The instructions included not having to agree that a crime was committed, which is another 6th Amendment violation.
- The instructions included not having to be unanimous on counts for the judge to deem the verdict as unanimous.
You mean like were there's lots of crime, drugs and people living in squalor?
Not the swining of America!!Swining? As in pearls before ... ?
Sure it is. This is couched as "hush money" trial. So, we have to start there.Not a good start to the argument.
Starting with reality is best. Dont fuss about what some people call it.Sure it is. This is couched as "hush money" trial. So, we have to start there.
I did. Don't confuse a jury verdict with facts. This is like confusing reality with politics. If 51% of the population says Jesus is not the Messiah, do you reply well, you dictate reality?Starting with reality is best.
Yeah, there's a guy known for his reasonable, sensible takes on things.Even RFK Jr. is comparing this to what goes on in a banana republic.
What are you talking about? That has nothing to do with the question of is this about "hush money" as you claimed.I did. Don't confuse a jury verdict with facts. This is like confusing reality with politics. If 51% of the population says Jesus is not the Messiah, do you reply well, you dictate reality?
That's good to hear.Yeah, there's a guy known for his reasonable, sensible takes on things.
And Trump and his supporters gracefully accept those results, just like they did last time, only with much, much more fervor.
Last time was just a practice run at acceptance and humility, I'm sure they'll get it much better this time.
double-down, double-down, double-down... the more you do it, the more it's the only thing you can do
Yes. As do most legal experts.I just love the smell of napalm in the morning. Don't you? https://myfox8.com/news/politics/nc...ump-with-independents-in-3-states-poll-finds/
What a time to be alive to experience democracy in action. Does anyone who is not a rabid Democrat think that was a fair trial?
The irony of quoting a movie dedicated to showcasing the issues of demagoguery is palpable.Let's list here the many reasons this will be overturned on appeal. We've reduced ourselves to a 3rd world banana republic, using the levers of power against political opponents.I suspect poll numbers and donations to Trump will rise after this display, which was a forgone conclusion. This will be glorious.
View attachment 348979
Even RFK Jr. is comparing this to what goes on in a banana republic.
I'm sorry, I'm going to go off topic a little bit but this is a pet peeve of mine.Falsification of records in order to facilitate the use of certain types of funds as the "moneys to be paid", is.
What would lend credibility to this trial being a sham?...as if citing RFK Jr lends *any credibility*
What would lend credibility to this trial being a sham?
International court watchers calling it a sham.What would lend credibility to this trial being a sham?