Trump is clearly entitled to a directed verdict in the NY case
| Orange up-to-no-good tattoo menage | 05/21/24 | | Cracking apoplectic trailer park weed whacker | 05/21/24 | | Topaz racy cruise ship | 05/21/24 | | cobalt mildly autistic locus | 05/21/24 | | stirring geriatric rigor state | 05/21/24 | | shimmering gas station coldplay fan | 05/21/24 | | Cracking apoplectic trailer park weed whacker | 05/21/24 | | stirring geriatric rigor state | 05/21/24 | | Electric station | 05/21/24 | | Cracking apoplectic trailer park weed whacker | 05/21/24 | | appetizing rigpig | 05/21/24 | | stirring geriatric rigor state | 05/21/24 | | appetizing rigpig | 05/21/24 | | beta twinkling box office | 05/21/24 | | appetizing rigpig | 05/21/24 | | Electric station | 05/21/24 | | appetizing rigpig | 05/21/24 | | Electric station | 05/21/24 | | stirring geriatric rigor state | 05/21/24 | | Electric station | 05/21/24 | | Cracking apoplectic trailer park weed whacker | 05/21/24 | | stirring geriatric rigor state | 05/21/24 | | stirring geriatric rigor state | 05/21/24 | | Electric station | 05/21/24 | | stirring geriatric rigor state | 05/21/24 | | Electric station | 05/21/24 | | sadistic boyish party of the first part | 05/21/24 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: May 21st, 2024 3:54 PM Author: appetizing rigpig
"You must remember, the People are not required to prove these offenses beyond a reasonable doubt; therefore, that reduces the need or the burden to define every term and every phrase," Merchan said, per Vance's blog. Merchan made the comment while discussing whether the defense could call an expert in campaign finance law.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/judge-merchan-tipped-his-hand-on-key-issue-attorney/ar-BB1mLWxJ
======
can someone walk me through this? if that's so, then what proof would Trump be on notice to provide to contradict something that the prosecution doesn't even have to define?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680538)
|
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:19 PM Author: stirring geriatric rigor state
yes. i posted the prosecutions motion on this when they were defending the indictment, but they literally argued, and the judge accepted, that defining what the second crime was would "limit their prosecution's strategies."
it makes sense when you consider that when these cases are brought it's obvious that the falsifier was up to something. if you had business records with material falsifications that could not have occurred by accident, it may be obvious you had criminal intent, even though i might not be able to prove how or who you were trying to defraud. for example, let's say that i falsified my assets in case i had an insurance claim, but i never made such a claim, then i would still be guilty here.
the only reason it's ridiculous here is because of how attenuated the case is at every level.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680604) |
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:51 PM Author: sadistic boyish party of the first part
Law noob here. Do state court judges usually granted directed verdicts in criminal cases?
Does it make a difference if the judge is a Jew from New York and the defendant is Donald Trump?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680760) |
|
|