The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Trump is clearly entitled to a directed verdict in the NY case
Poast new message in this thread
Date: May 21st, 2024 3:39 PM Author: shaky concupiscible ratface (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680465) |
Date: May 21st, 2024 3:40 PM Author: transparent codepig he should be entitled to have a judge who isn't a child molester (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680470) |
 |
Date: May 21st, 2024 3:42 PM Author: buck-toothed rigor (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680481) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 3:42 PM Author: Hairraiser costumed home lettuce (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680485) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 3:43 PM Author: Adventurous Fighting Degenerate Corner (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680486) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:15 PM Author: Aquamarine arousing den so basically everyone who says something you dont like is a child molester? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680599) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:48 PM Author: transparent codepig no, only people with pedo faces
e.g. - https://media-cldnry.s-nbcnews.com/image/upload/t_fit-1240w,f_auto,q_auto:best/rockcms/2023-04/230404-judge-juan-merchan-ONETIMEUSEmn-1000-81c30e.jpg |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 3:43 PM Author: Adventurous Fighting Degenerate Corner he was entitled to have the indictments dismissed. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680489) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 3:44 PM Author: Walnut hissy fit hell Trump is special how is a jury of nonrichmos even allowed to decide his fate? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680495) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 3:56 PM Author: transparent codepig why should 80 iq blacks and DNC affiliated pedophiles get to decide his fate? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680543) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 3:54 PM Author: cowardly mewling meetinghouse "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.
====== 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?
|
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 3:58 PM Author: Adventurous Fighting Degenerate Corner he's referring to the second crime prong. the jury doesn't need to find that trump's alleged falsification actually advanced a second crime, only that he intended for it to. they still have to find his criminal intent to advance a second crime beyond a reasonable doubt. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680547) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:02 PM Author: cowardly mewling meetinghouse thanks. i'm not arguing, just trying to understand. is it true that the prosecution has not defined the second crime and the judge has not made them? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680559) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:06 PM Author: idiotic legend I think true as of today but maybe that changed in the jury instruction motions? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680571) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:08 PM Author: cowardly mewling meetinghouse so, again, for Trump to disprove the prosecution's theory Trump would have to put on proof that he didn't intend violations of all the laws of NY and the US? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680580) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:07 PM Author: Walnut hissy fit hell there was some discussion in court today about the second crime being a violation of NY election law there’s going to be a jury instruction to that effect (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680577) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:14 PM Author: cowardly mewling meetinghouse isn't that something the defendant would need to know by the time the jury is sworn in? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680591) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:16 PM Author: Walnut hissy fit hell maybe maybe not (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680600) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:20 PM Author: Adventurous Fighting Degenerate Corner "we need to prosecute political enemies under secret indictments that are not revealed to them to *save* democracy!" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680610) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:25 PM Author: Walnut hissy fit hell yes actually (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680632) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:51 PM Author: transparent codepig you are a mentally retarded jewish pedophile and gunnerfag needs to have his head dunked into an unflushed toilet for actually engaging with you (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680759) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:55 PM Author: Adventurous Fighting Degenerate Corner http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&mc=26&forum_id=2#47680629
i thought this was a different quotemo as this seemed like a general and pro-trump leaning inquiry. |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:19 PM Author: Adventurous Fighting Degenerate Corner 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. |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:24 PM Author: Walnut hissy fit hell but wouldn’t the charging document have to specify that you inflated your assets the purpose of making a false insurance claim (which, granted, you never made) so that you could present evidence refuting that that was the reason you inflated your assets? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680629) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:33 PM Author: Adventurous Fighting Degenerate Corner no, that's what i mean, if you falsified your business assets in some flagrant way a jury could find that you did so with criminal intent even if the prosecution could not point to exactly how and who you would defraud. maybe you were planning to sell your business or obtain a loan you wouldn't have qualified for? i just put in "for insurance fraud" for the hypo, but IRL the state may not know what the second crime may have been. you could have just been doing it "just in case" you wanted to commit a crime later.
i'm not saying this is good or bad law, only that this is the law in NY as i understand it from the prosecution's filings. |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:40 PM Author: Walnut hissy fit hell got it. that makes sense. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5531101&forum_id=2#47680700) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2024 4:51 PM Author: cerebral trailer park 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? |