The potential underlying crimes were never mentioned until the prosecution's closing argument, then repeated in Merchan's jury charging instructions.

And in NY, the defense goes first in closing arguments, so they never had a chance to respond to the first mention of the potential underlying crimes.

That is one of maybe half a dozen or more reversible errors that almost certainly will result in an overturned verdict, but of course, the prosecution and judge knew this, but got exactly what they wanted. Calling Trump a convicted felon before the election.

And Merchan is rubbing salt in the wound by scheduling Trump's sentencing hearing 4 days before the Republican convention starts.

When a liberal Harvard Law Professor who voted for Biden says...it was rigged.

(05-31-2024 10:38 PM)TripleA Wrote:  The potential underlying crimes were never mentioned until the prosecution's closing argument, then repeated in Merchan's jury charging instructions.

And in NY, the defense goes first in closing arguments, so they never had a chance to respond to the first mention of the potential underlying crimes.

That is one of maybe half a dozen or more reversible errors that almost certainly will result in an overturned verdict, but of course, the prosecution and judge knew this, but got exactly what they wanted. Calling Trump a convicted felon before the election.

And Merchan is rubbing salt in the wound by scheduling Trump's sentencing hearing 4 days before the Republican convention starts.

When *should* the sentencing hearing be scheduled? Sentencing hearing in NYC typically are done in about 40 days or so. Seems bang on normal timing to me.

And, hate to tell you -- everyone knew that at least one of them would be the federal campaign finance law (just look at Trumps witness list for that), and one would be the NY election conspiracy law.

(05-31-2024 01:43 PM)TripleA Wrote:  I've given up even responding to the ideologically crippled idiots.

Anybody who thinks that was a fair trial and is the way justice should be handled in a constitutional republic is either ridiculously stupid or ridiculously biased, to the detriment of our country.

Those that do think like that are only watching the MSM who are against Trump. You can't form an unbiased opinion if you only see the Demoncrat side. If you do you'll believe every lie they spout.

(05-31-2024 10:51 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-31-2024 10:38 PM)TripleA Wrote:  The potential underlying crimes were never mentioned until the prosecution's closing argument, then repeated in Merchan's jury charging instructions.

And in NY, the defense goes first in closing arguments, so they never had a chance to respond to the first mention of the potential underlying crimes.

That is one of maybe half a dozen or more reversible errors that almost certainly will result in an overturned verdict, but of course, the prosecution and judge knew this, but got exactly what they wanted. Calling Trump a convicted felon before the election.

And Merchan is rubbing salt in the wound by scheduling Trump's sentencing hearing 4 days before the Republican convention starts.

When *should* the sentencing hearing be scheduled? Sentencing hearing in NYC typically are done in about 40 days or so. Seems bang on normal timing to me.

And, hate to tell you -- everyone knew that at least one of them would be the federal campaign finance law (just look at Trumps witness list for that), and one would be the NY election conspiracy law.

Yeah, the sentencing timing was just pure coincidence. He could easily have made it right AFTER the convention.

And, "hate to tell you" -- the jury didn't "know" what the alleged crimes were, during the trial. They are the only ones who count.

Closing arguments are not evidence, in case you forgot.

And allowing jurors to choose between 3 underlying crimes without being unanimous on any one will be a potential reversible error, among several others.

Of course, I'm not surprised that you think a lot of this was okay.

(06-01-2024 12:07 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-31-2024 10:51 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-31-2024 10:38 PM)TripleA Wrote:  The potential underlying crimes were never mentioned until the prosecution's closing argument, then repeated in Merchan's jury charging instructions.

And in NY, the defense goes first in closing arguments, so they never had a chance to respond to the first mention of the potential underlying crimes.

That is one of maybe half a dozen or more reversible errors that almost certainly will result in an overturned verdict, but of course, the prosecution and judge knew this, but got exactly what they wanted. Calling Trump a convicted felon before the election.

And Merchan is rubbing salt in the wound by scheduling Trump's sentencing hearing 4 days before the Republican convention starts.

When *should* the sentencing hearing be scheduled? Sentencing hearing in NYC typically are done in about 40 days or so. Seems bang on normal timing to me.

And, hate to tell you -- everyone knew that at least one of them would be the federal campaign finance law (just look at Trumps witness list for that), and one would be the NY election conspiracy law.

Yeah, the sentencing timing was just pure coincidence. He could easily have made it right AFTER the convention.

And, "hate to tell you" -- the jury didn't "know" what the alleged crimes were, during the trial. They are the only ones who count.

The prosecution doesnt have to announce in trial *to* the jury *in specificity* what the underlying crimes are. The prosecution introduces evidence as to the factual events.

The jury is then given the jury charge -- in that jury charge the jury members are told *exactly* what the elements of the main case are.

In this matter, one of the elements was 'in order to conceal another [underlying] crime'. In that jury charge, the jury is told what those underlying crimes are, and what acts or facts constitute those underlying charges. The jury is then told to apply the facts in evidence to the main charge, and in this case the underlying charge(s).

I do not know why you (and many others) harp on the 'underlying charges not being mentioned to the jury' at trial. The only thing that is important is that the jury make a finding of fact according the jury charge -- and in this case the underlying crimes were spelled out as an element, 'how' those underlying crimes are defined, and in the facts spelled out in trial, do the facts support the element that the underlying crime was met as an element.

You would be dead on correct if Trump's charges included the underlying charges as a charged crime. But that isnt what happened here. The jury only has to use the roadmap to determine if another uncharged crime existed, and whether that crime served as what Trump was trying to conceal.

Quote:Closing arguments are not evidence, in case you forgot.

Not at all, good sir. The problem is that the notice requirement refers to *charged* crimes -- not uncharged crimes, and not uncharged crimes that are themselves only an element.

Quote:And allowing jurors to choose between 3 underlying crimes without being unanimous on any one will be a potential reversible error, among several others.

Nope. NY Sup. Ct. already has caselaw on the point for the statute to the contrary of what you say. And there are also other types of crimes that require the same 'need to have another crime included as only an element' style. And in those types of cases the same 'need not be unanimous' in the underlying crime is not an error of law.

Quote:Of course, I'm not surprised that you think a lot of this was okay.

I am sorry you dont know the constructs at play, yet you feel the necessity of the above.

Quote:

Anything to fuel the constant 'if you lose, it is some vast form of conspiracy' that seems to permeate this crowd (and to be honest, much of the political right at this juncture), I guess.

(06-01-2024 01:31 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-01-2024 12:07 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-31-2024 10:51 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-31-2024 10:38 PM)TripleA Wrote:  The potential underlying crimes were never mentioned until the prosecution's closing argument, then repeated in Merchan's jury charging instructions.

And in NY, the defense goes first in closing arguments, so they never had a chance to respond to the first mention of the potential underlying crimes.

That is one of maybe half a dozen or more reversible errors that almost certainly will result in an overturned verdict, but of course, the prosecution and judge knew this, but got exactly what they wanted. Calling Trump a convicted felon before the election.

And Merchan is rubbing salt in the wound by scheduling Trump's sentencing hearing 4 days before the Republican convention starts.

When *should* the sentencing hearing be scheduled? Sentencing hearing in NYC typically are done in about 40 days or so. Seems bang on normal timing to me.

And, hate to tell you -- everyone knew that at least one of them would be the federal campaign finance law (just look at Trumps witness list for that), and one would be the NY election conspiracy law.

Yeah, the sentencing timing was just pure coincidence. He could easily have made it right AFTER the convention.

And, "hate to tell you" -- the jury didn't "know" what the alleged crimes were, during the trial. They are the only ones who count.

The prosecution doesnt have to announce in trial *to* the jury *in specificity* what the underlying crimes are. The prosecution introduces evidence as to the factual events.

The jury is then given the jury charge -- in that jury charge the jury members are told *exactly* what the elements of the main case are.

In this matter, one of the elements was 'in order to conceal another [underlying] crime'. In that jury charge, the jury is told what those underlying crimes are, and what acts or facts constitute those underlying charges. The jury is then told to apply the facts in evidence to the main charge, and in this case the underlying charge(s).

I do not know why you (and many others) harp on the 'underlying charges not being mentioned to the jury' at trial. The only thing that is important is that the jury make a finding of fact according the jury charge -- and in this case the underlying crimes were spelled out as an element, 'how' those underlying crimes are defined, and in the facts spelled out in trial, do the facts support the element that the underlying crime was met as an element.

You would be dead on correct if Trump's charges included the underlying charges as a charged crime. But that isnt what happened here. The jury only has to use the roadmap to determine if another uncharged crime existed, and whether that crime served as what Trump was trying to conceal.

Quote:Closing arguments are not evidence, in case you forgot.

Not at all, good sir. The problem is that the notice requirement refers to *charged* crimes -- not uncharged crimes, and not uncharged crimes that are themselves only an element.

Quote:And allowing jurors to choose between 3 underlying crimes without being unanimous on any one will be a potential reversible error, among several others.

Nope. NY Sup. Ct. already has caselaw on the point for the statute to the contrary of what you say. And there are also other types of crimes that require the same 'need to have another crime included as only an element' style. And in those types of cases the same 'need not be unanimous' in the underlying crime is not an error of law.

Quote:Of course, I'm not surprised that you think a lot of this was okay.

I am sorry you dont know the constructs at play, yet you feel the necessity of the above.

Quote:

Anything to fuel the constant 'if you lose, it is some vast form of conspiracy' that seems to permeate this crowd (and to be honest, much of the political right at this juncture), I guess.

I’m glad you’re back. Thinking you got a win. Digging harder than ever. How about Jack Bois’s case? You know the prosecutor that you said was an excellent and honest prosecutor. Dig the hole deeper.

You may be able to stick around with your bullchit elitism for a little while longer. It will take a lot of time to win this travesty on appeal.

Then you’ll be gone from here again.

(06-01-2024 07:21 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  I’m glad you’re back. Thinking you got a win. Digging harder than ever.

I didnt get a win. I had nothing to do with the case, and nothing vested in it.

Bummer that Trump got hit with what amounts to a basic conspiracy to commit campaign finance violations. Actually more of a bummer for his more rabid followers who are are thrashing about in rage right now, pretty much trying to find *any* excuse to justify his actions at any cost.

Maybe the next lesson he has learned is not to drive the bus over the bag man. Kind of a hard way to learn that is not a bright thing to do.

Quote:How about Jack Bois’s case? You know the prosecutor that you said was an excellent and honest prosecutor. Dig the hole deeper.

Actually Trump has done a superb job of gumming up the process in them. That is what the orange haired guy seemingly does best at in life.

Quote:You may be able to stick around with your bullchit elitism for a little while longer. It will take a lot of time to win this travesty on appeal.

Nah, it is way too much fun to see how much people invent 'alternate facts' on this forum. And even more so to see how enraged some folks can get when real facts impinge on their perception of reality.

(05-29-2024 01:14 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Thre judge is the prosecutor in this case. This is pure Gestapo/KGB stuff.

(06-01-2024 10:35 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-29-2024 01:14 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Thre judge is the prosecutor in this case. This is pure Gestapo/KGB stuff.

Judge basically told the Jury he had committed one of three crimes (without ever being charged, much less convicted) and they just had to agree he committed the same dead Misdemeanor 34 times for there to be a felony. Sounds like territorial law during the 1800s out west. I still find it difficult to wrap my head around how someone can affect an election after the election is over.

(06-01-2024 11:02 AM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(06-01-2024 10:35 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-29-2024 01:14 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Thre judge is the prosecutor in this case. This is pure Gestapo/KGB stuff.

Judge basically told the Jury he had committed one of three crimes (without ever being charged, much less convicted) and they just had to agree he committed the same dead Misdemeanor 34 times for there to be a felony. Sounds like territorial law during the 1800s out west. I still find it difficult to wrap my head around how someone can affect an election after the election is over.

Uh... no. The bolded is just simply fully incorrect. I would suggest actually looking the jury instruction over.

(06-01-2024 11:09 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-01-2024 11:02 AM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(06-01-2024 10:35 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-29-2024 01:14 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Thre judge is the prosecutor in this case. This is pure Gestapo/KGB stuff.

Judge basically told the Jury he had committed one of three crimes (without ever being charged, much less convicted) and they just had to agree he committed the same dead Misdemeanor 34 times for there to be a felony. Sounds like territorial law during the 1800s out west. I still find it difficult to wrap my head around how someone can affect an election after the election is over.

Uh... no. The bolded is just simply fully incorrect. I would suggest actually looking the jury instruction over.

what do I always tell ya ... it's like a Roseanne Roseannadanna spiel, "it's a always a something!"

#cyaInCourt #cyaAtAppeal

you've achieved a new level of maintaining 0fer with this latest TDS 'rash' of yours ...

you're a trip to the moonshot ...






addendum: IIRC, I gave ya 3 convictions on this case last year when filed .... little did I know it was like the Twister (game) Banquet Buffet directive from the judge, jury, and Jarooneys...

this stupid arse shite is in full blown chud, chad, and Chink'd 'modus'...

(06-01-2024 11:18 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(06-01-2024 11:09 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-01-2024 11:02 AM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(06-01-2024 10:35 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-29-2024 01:14 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Thre judge is the prosecutor in this case. This is pure Gestapo/KGB stuff.

Judge basically told the Jury he had committed one of three crimes (without ever being charged, much less convicted) and they just had to agree he committed the same dead Misdemeanor 34 times for there to be a felony. Sounds like territorial law during the 1800s out west. I still find it difficult to wrap my head around how someone can affect an election after the election is over.

Uh... no. The bolded is just simply fully incorrect. I would suggest actually looking the jury instruction over.

what do I always tell ya ... it's like a Roseanne Roseannadanna spiel, "it's a always a something!"

#cyaInCourt #cyaAtAppeal

you've achieved a new level of maintaining 0fer with this latest TDS 'rash' of yours ...

you're a trip to the moonshot ...






addendum: IIRC, I gave ya 3 convictions on this case last year when filed .... little did I know it was like the Twister (game) Banquet Buffet directive from the judge, jury, and Jarooneys...

this stupid arse shite is in full blown chud, chad, and Chink'd 'modus'...

b/c they always come in treys (the addendum made two)

Quote:'cause it's da ______, that's a fact

'cause it's da ______, and they're suckin' muh sac

'cause it's da ______, what a game

'cause it's da ______, ain' got no shame

'cause it's da ______!

set to this jingle, explains it every.single.time. ....





@should'veBeenBornAjew

(05-31-2024 10:51 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-31-2024 10:38 PM)TripleA Wrote:  The potential underlying crimes were never mentioned until the prosecution's closing argument, then repeated in Merchan's jury charging instructions.

And in NY, the defense goes first in closing arguments, so they never had a chance to respond to the first mention of the potential underlying crimes.

That is one of maybe half a dozen or more reversible errors that almost certainly will result in an overturned verdict, but of course, the prosecution and judge knew this, but got exactly what they wanted. Calling Trump a convicted felon before the election.

And Merchan is rubbing salt in the wound by scheduling Trump's sentencing hearing 4 days before the Republican convention starts.

When *should* the sentencing hearing be scheduled? Sentencing hearing in NYC typically are done in about 40 days or so. Seems bang on normal timing to me.

And, hate to tell you -- everyone knew that at least one of them would be the federal campaign finance law (just look at Trumps witness list for that), and one would be the NY election conspiracy law.

Campaign finance law. What a joke on its merit. Marchant denied the testimony of the accountant that made the entry. He denied the expert testimony of the FEC. He called Cohen an accomplice. He allowed the prosecution to say numerous times Trump was guilty of campaign finance fraud. Trump was none of these.
You will get to hang around with this idiocy with the likes of Menstra, Khrushchev and Tommie Bois for a little while longer. I just hope you have more courage when the end of this comes. And it will come.

(06-01-2024 10:19 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-01-2024 07:21 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  I’m glad you’re back. Thinking you got a win. Digging harder than ever.

I didnt get a win. I had nothing to do with the case, and nothing vested in it.

Bummer that Trump got hit with what amounts to a basic conspiracy to commit campaign finance violations. Actually more of a bummer for his more rabid followers who are are thrashing about in rage right now, pretty much trying to find *any* excuse to justify his actions at any cost.

Maybe the next lesson he has learned is not to drive the bus over the bag man. Kind of a hard way to learn that is not a bright thing to do.

Quote:How about Jack Bois’s case? You know the prosecutor that you said was an excellent and honest prosecutor. Dig the hole deeper.

Actually Trump has done a superb job of gumming up the process in them. That is what the orange haired guy seemingly does best at in life.

Quote:You may be able to stick around with your bullchit elitism for a little while longer. It will take a lot of time to win this travesty on appeal.

Nah, it is way too much fun to see how much people invent 'alternate facts' on this forum. And even more so to see how enraged some folks can get when real facts impinge on their perception of reality.

Been paying attention to the JackBoi documents case?

A court of appeals won’t be able to tell which of the options the jury used for the underlined crime or not because the verdict doesn’t say.

There can be legitimate arguments that campaign finance violations theory is preempted by federal laws or how tax violations theory promoted a election but the problem is that the defense doesn’t know and doubtful the Appeals court can ever find out. It’s basically 2020 election results and fraud claims and the judges said ‘well too late it’s been spoil’


That’s why the case should be tossed

(06-01-2024 10:19 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-01-2024 07:21 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  I’m glad you’re back. Thinking you got a win. Digging harder than ever.

I didnt get a win. I had nothing to do with the case, and nothing vested in it.

Bummer that Trump got hit with what amounts to a basic conspiracy to commit campaign finance violations. Actually more of a bummer for his more rabid followers who are are thrashing about in rage right now, pretty much trying to find *any* excuse to justify his actions at any cost.

Maybe the next lesson he has learned is not to drive the bus over the bag man. Kind of a hard way to learn that is not a bright thing to do.

Quote:How about Jack Bois’s case? You know the prosecutor that you said was an excellent and honest prosecutor. Dig the hole deeper.

Actually Trump has done a superb job of gumming up the process in them. That is what the orange haired guy seemingly does best at in life.

Quote:You may be able to stick around with your bullchit elitism for a little while longer. It will take a lot of time to win this travesty on appeal.

Nah, it is way too much fun to see how much people invent 'alternate facts' on this forum. And even more so to see how enraged some folks can get when real facts impinge on their perception of reality.

Here are some facts for you.

GWU Law Professor Jonathan Turley seems to disagree with some of your facts.

Quote:The Ghost of John Adams: How the Trump Trial Harkens Back to a Dark Period of American Law

EXCERPT:

Undeniable reality

Political prosecutions are something most citizens associate with dictatorships.

But the Trump prosecution has forced many to confront the undeniable reality of the politicization of our legal system.

In many respects, President Biden and Democrats have re-created the Adams era.

Biden has led calls for censorship of political critics and his administration has coordinated the silencing and the blacklisting of those with opposing views.

Democratic politicians have pressured social-media companies to serve as surrogates for the government in banning, throttling and defunding individuals and groups.

Indeed, I have previously written that Biden is now the most anti-free-speech president since Adams.

The Adams era also reflected the same blind loyalty of many media outlets.

Federalist publications supported the crackdowns while echoing charges against political opponents as seditionists and insurrectionists.

Jeffersonian publications, like Callender’s, attacked Adams for his “unbounded thirst for ridiculous pomp, foolish adulation, and selfish avarice.”

The nation was divided down the middle as both sides accused each other of being traitors and insurrectionists. Sound familiar?

A chilling return

Yet, it is the politicization of the legal system that is the most chilling return to the Adams era.

Even liberal legal analysts and figures have admitted that the case against Trump was unprecedented and would not have been brought against anyone other than Trump.

CNN legal analyst Elie Honig recently wrote that there should be concern over a judge being appointed (not randomly selected) who is not just a Biden donor but someone who “has earmarked donations for ‘resisting the Republican Party and Donald Trump’s radical right-wing legacy.’”

Adding to these concerns is the movement of the third-highest official in the Biden Justice Department to the staff of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg to build the case against Trump.

Before joining the case, Matthew Colangelo was also paid by the Democratic National Committee for “political consulting.”

So Trump was convicted in a trial with a Biden donor judge, who has a daughter who is a major Democratic operative, a lead prosecutor previously paid as a DNC political consultant and a jury selected in a district that voted roughly 90% against Trump.

The trial itself was a travesty.

Even after sitting in the courtroom watching the trial and the verdict, I still have no idea what Trump was convicted of in the case.

The charges were built on a dead misdemeanor barred with the passage of the statute of limitations.

It was zapped back into life by alleging that the falsification of business records occurred to unlawfully influence the 2016 presidential election.

Merchan told the jury members that they did not have to agree on what those unlawful means may have been.

Specifically, he allowed them to base their verdict on any one of three vaguely defined crimes of a federal election violation, falsification of business records or taxation violations.

Thus, the jury could have divided 4-4-4 on what actually occurred but the verdict was still treated as unanimous by Merchan to convict Trump.

Like much else in the case, that didn’t matter in deep-blue Manhattan.

Read much more here:

https://jonathanturley.org/2024/06/01/th...rican-law/

(06-01-2024 11:18 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(06-01-2024 11:09 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-01-2024 11:02 AM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(06-01-2024 10:35 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-29-2024 01:14 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Thre judge is the prosecutor in this case. This is pure Gestapo/KGB stuff.

Judge basically told the Jury he had committed one of three crimes (without ever being charged, much less convicted) and they just had to agree he committed the same dead Misdemeanor 34 times for there to be a felony. Sounds like territorial law during the 1800s out west. I still find it difficult to wrap my head around how someone can affect an election after the election is over.

Uh... no. The bolded is just simply fully incorrect. I would suggest actually looking the jury instruction over.

what do I always tell ya ... it's like a Roseanne Roseannadanna spiel, "it's a always a something!"

#cyaInCourt #cyaAtAppeal

you've achieved a new level of maintaining 0fer with this latest TDS 'rash' of yours ...

you're a trip to the moonshot ...






addendum: IIRC, I gave ya 3 convictions on this case last year when filed .... little did I know it was like the Twister (game) Banquet Buffet directive from the judge, jury, and Jarooneys...

this stupid arse shite is in full blown chud, chad, and Chink'd 'modus'...

He will be wrong like Rosanna Rosanna Dana but he will never utter “never mind”. He will just disappear. It’s all about superiority to him.

(05-31-2024 09:48 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-31-2024 09:31 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Trump paid Cohen and his bookkeepers called it a legal expense AFTER the election. How do you ACTIVELY affect an election AFTER it has taken place?

There was ostensibly a campaign finance violation *prior* to the election. Trump tried to smother the Stormy Daniels story, had another person pay for it. The cover up of falsifying the business records occurred after the election, and as Trump tried to reimburse Cohen. That is, the actions that Cohen and Trump agreed to happen, and for which Cohen got popped for campaign finance fraud.

That is, the first crime was actively trying to affect an election, and an active campaign finance no no. The second crime was covering that up by falsifying the business records of the second transaction.

All of that started in 2011 waaay prior to him running for election. Pages 31-34 of the jury instructions spells it out for the jury to choose and none were brought up during the trial, only during the summation.

Jury Instructions
Go to page 31 to the "underlying crimes" that were never brought up during the trial.