[MTBobcat]

Much easier to appeal a bench verdict. A jury would have convicted him anyhow.

[Miami Rebel]

“Much easier to appeal a bench verdict.”

Untrue, I think.

There is no difference in the grounds for appealing either a jury or non-jury verdict. In either case an appeals court must find a flaw in the application of the law. Matters of fact-finding in the trial wouldn’t be reviewable.

[vivenne]

This.

[Boogieman]

Yep, especially because they can probably provide plenty of evidence to show this particular judge was biased.

[circlecity]

“ Much easier to appeal a bench verdict.’

Is it? Not sure how.

[Labyrinthos]

“Much easier to appeal a bench verdict. A jury would have convicted him anyhow.”

You are absolutely correct. Jury verdicts are near sacred on appeal; a judge’s decision, not so much.

[amihow]

Much easier to appeal a bench verdict. A jury would have convicted him anyhow.
........
You are correct IF attorneys challeng appealabe misdeeds of judge timely.

[JimRed]

A jury would have convicted him anyhow.

Frightening prospect, being tried by twelve Democrats who were not smart enough to get out of jury duty!

[Zathras]

A jury in NYC would convict him of anything.