Posted on 05/22/2024 5:48:18 AM PDT by Red Badger
(DCNF)—George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said he was concerned about jury instructions related to intent which could allow the 12 members to use a lower standard of proof to convict former President Donald Trump.
New York Judge Juan Merchan, attorneys with the office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and Trump’s lawyers met Tuesday to discuss what instructions would be given to the jury after former legal adviser to Michael Cohen, Bob Costello, finished his testimony. Turley expressed his concern to Fox News host Neil Cavuto, citing Merchan’s pattern of granting Bragg’s prosecutors leeway.
“The government is arguing some pretty sweeping positions,” Turley told Cavuto. “Among them, they are arguing ‘I don’t have to prove willful intent on all of the elements on all of these actions.’ They’re suggesting that things like unlawful means which is really an important term of influencing election can be satisfied by less than the criminal standard and the defense [is], I think, legitimately saying ‘Whoa, you know, you’re going to convict someone on a lower than criminal standard on an important element.’”
“And this is really the result of this sort of Frankenstein case, you know… Bragg took this dead misdemeanor and zapped that back to life as a felony by sort of stitching together different crimes,” Turley continued. “And now, the government is trying to use that to say, ‘Yeah, we did that, but it also means we don’t have to prove the full criminal standard on all elements.’”
WATCH:
VIDEO AT LINK.................
Bragg secured an indictment of Trump on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in March 2023. Turley noted that Merchan’s treatment of Costello raised concerns that Merchan was displaying bias.
“He has made some good decisions, but they have largely gone in favor of the prosecution,” Turley told Cavuto earlier. “Some of the most important decisions he is taking on advisement, but some of the decisions he’s made today, quite frankly, are hard to figure out, you know, you – for example, with Costello the former attorney for Cohen and the prosecutors stopped Costello from fully answering a question on what he meant in an E-mail. And so when the defense got the chance, they said, ‘Would you like to explain”’ and the prosecution said ‘No, you know, it’s beyond the scope.’ That should have been a ridiculous objection and Merchan, however, sustained it. It was the same scope, he was being asked what did you mean by that, and the judge sustained.”
“So it’s moments like that where you really feel like there might be a thumb on the scale,” Turley continued. “The most important stuff going on right now is probably the least engaging for a passerby. It deals with how the jury will be instructed. That could very well determine the outcome in this case.”
Turley previously criticized Merchan for suggesting that former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg testify as prosecutors from the office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg sought to introduce Weisselberg’s severance package into evidence. Merchan made a $15 donation to Biden’s election campaign in 2020 and two $10 donations, one to a group dedicated to “resisting” the “right-wing legacy” of then-President Donald Trump and another to a “Progressive Turnout Project,” according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) records.
“filth”? They believe they are saving democracy/s.
basically, if they find President Trump is a republican... they must find him guilty.
You don't really think that matters, do you? The jury is probably an OJ-jury which doesn't consider the facts whatsoever.
How many Jurors lied to get on the stand to make history. That is my concern.
The brown envelopes were thick they received.
They wouldn’t have staged this trial to ultimately exonerate Trump. The fix is in.
Unconstitutional deprivation of due process of law. You can’t have a lesser burden of proof for Trump and greater one for Democrats.
Trump will be convicted because its necessary to inflame the public. It will be overturned on appeal. All of these cases have been engineered by Trump to wake people up. None of them will be successful. I don’t like the term “you’re watching a movie” but all of this stuff has been orchestrated for the specific purpose of exposing the bad actors and waking the public up.
Expect things to get a lot more turbulent in the next 90 days as the deep state grows more desperate. They are being backed into a corner.
Not a lawyer here.
Trump has 34 counts against him to be decided upon by the jury.
If even ONE count is a hung jury, does that create a mistrial for the whole case and require starting over? What about if they convict him as guilty on some and hung jury on others?
Does he get sentenced on the guilty counts and possible retrial on only the hung jury counts or does a hung jury result on even ONE of 34 counts toss the whole thing back for possible retrial?
And leave the DOJ free to privately pay a call and “visit” with members of the jury about “their vote”.
The Deep State badly needs a win. Everything they do makes Trump stronger. This jury will convict and President Trump must appeal. But in the meantime, they have their win. Hopefully all it will do is give President Trump the assurance of ten more points in the polls and add another battleground state to his column.
Laura Ingraham played a video of some analyst pointing out what a spectacular victory that was for the prosecution because the jury wouldn't have to quibble over that detail.
Agreed. Its nerve wracking but the roaches must be exposed before they can scurry under the baseboards.
Yes it is nerve wracking and infuriating. But there are several hundred thousand sealed indictments floating around so most of these bad actors will eventually face the music.
Others can correct if this isn’t correct, but I think the 34# was rigged up as that number to fool people into believing they’re 34 separate entities when they are essentially the same thing (whatever that “thing” is) counted as if separate.
Does Merchan have a record of being a pro prosecution judge?
The judge rams through a conviction, but won’t sentence Trump to jail, just 6 months house arrest...
Trump will be convicted as certainly as anyone facing show trials in Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, North Korea or Cuba. The verdict will be thrown out on appeal, but the intended damage to Trump’s campaign and his reputation will have been accomplished.
If they do....the Republican Party will be no more. Period.
I think the “Damage to Trump, etc.” has flattened out and the opposite has occurred and continues to occur. The more they display their despotic behavior with show trails the more people realize their true nature and are driven to support Trump. Trump might not have even been the nominee if the Rats had just left him alone. Even if he had gotten the nomination had he had been left alone, he would be a weaker candidate then he is now.
Thank you for responding. I think I understand your point; just wondering if the jury (unpredictable in theory) might hang on some or vote one way or the other on all of the 34 counts and what that means afterwards.
If they DON’T vote the same on all; either hung jury with holdouts, guilty, or not guilty, can Merchan go ahead and sentence Trump on the guilty ones and only have Bragg decide about refiling on the hung jury ones?
Or does a hung jury hold out on ANY of the 34 rubber stamp counts mean a hung jury for all of them and Bragg has to refile all of them for another trial?
Just being picky because it makes a huge difference here and have seen different things stated as the answer sort of, but not convincingly.
Someone legal should know here and this point should get discussion in news articles but if it has, I haven’t seen it above the chatter noise.
Again, thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.