So question for lawyers out there. Is the burden of proving ‘sound mind’ on the individual in question, or is the burden of proving not of sound mind on the accuser? I would have thought the burden of proof would be on the latter, but some googling gives me the impression its on the former.
The burden would be on the individual if he uses “incompetence” as an affirmative defense. The burden would be on the accuser if the accusation made is “incompetence”. Problem is that if an accusation of incompetence has to be proven at hearing, you may not be able to call the individual to testify - you’re already claiming he is incompetent. You would need an expert that has examined the individual to testify. There are none existing that would testify to help the accuser as far as Biden goes.
Agreed......
But Trump can just state his case to void Biden’s “contracts”, move on as if they were not valid, and leave it to the “courts” for the next 2-3 years to decide, while, in the meanwhile, Trump moves on....this is the gameplay that the Progressives use against Team Us...In the meantime, he can prosecute Hunter, as if nothing has happened, if it serves Trump’s purpose in the short run