What about her? There are pretrial motions that have to be settled. The chief Judge has already weighed in and rejected the organized political complaints
was it less illegal?
no it doesn’t
no they didn’t, they asked for a bill of particulars
Where in the language of the Sixth Amendment does it say its protection only applies prior to a possible conviction?
Which is worse…a judge who is biased and delays a trial beyond when it was needed by the prosecutor to affect the election…or…a judge who rushes to judgment and directs the jury to,a guilty verdict?
We still don’t know which jurors believed which crime Trump was supposed to be hiding, or if they all agreed to,the same crime.
Even an indictment that is sufficient on its face may be challenged. Specifically, an indictment may fail when there is a fatal variance between its allegation and the evidence introduced at trial. In order for a variance to be fatal, it must pertain to an essential element of the crime charged.9 [State v. Langley, 173 N.C. App. 194, 197 (2005).]If the variance pertains to an allegation that is merely surplusage, it is not fatal.10 Fatal defects in indictments are jurisdictional, and may be raised at any time.11 [See, e.g., State v. Snyder, 343 N.C. 61, 65 (1996); State v. Sturdivant, 304 N.C. 293, 308 (1981)] SOURCE
lol.
of course!
The guy who gave $35 to Biden can’t be impartial but the woman APPOINTED BY TRUMP can.
Classic.
It’s quite insidious the idea that nobody can do their job now because of politics.
Yet we all get up and do our jobs regardless of who we voted for. Just as a jury had a job to do.
Might have been easier than you think if looking for fraudulent business activity the many cheques paid to Cohen from Trump org were all fake invoices.
The same judge would not allow the fact that Trump had a months long affair with Karen Mcdougal or allow the access Hollywood tape to be played.
He allowed Trump to go to his sons graduation.
what, you don’t trust the chief judge?
throwing the justice system under the bus for tds… sad
1 Like
written by cohen
See Trump’s Trial Violated Due Process
Wall Street Journal June 5, 2024
Turley may have a point about not blaming the jurors.
You are correct that Team Trump requested a Bill of Particulars, but you’re missing the part where that requested was in the same document (the “omnibus motion”) in which they also listed and argued against the applicability of the three predicate offenses that were at issue. The Bill of Particulars was a request for the facts supporting the individual charges, not for the legal theories, which they already knew.
Unanimity on a point which is not an element of the crime is not required. The law under which he was charged is a crime of general intent. So long as a juror believed that it was for some unlawful purpose, the crime has been proven.
I’m not sure what your point is. The right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation is inherently a Pretrial right. However the issue can be waived by non-assertion. It’s called procedural default. If you don’t raise it pre- or during trial, you may lose the right to appeal.
That is false. The only identified laws were “federal and state tax laws” without identifying the particular statutes, what the defense guessed at is not what matters. Also, NY and Federal election laws only generally identifying FECA, at that point the prosecution had not identified 17-152 and it was not a part of the defenses arguments. and "other falsified business records violations without identifying which statutes were violated. It is not the defenses responsibility to guess which laws the defendant is being charged with having violated, it is the prosecutions job to identify which specific statutes the defendant is said to have violated.
The prosecution in the case argued they didn’t have to identify which laws were violated, and the court corruptly agreed. That pretention is complete ■■■■■■■■■
1 Like
