Posted on 05/30/2024 6:51:54 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator
Edited on 05/30/2024 6:53:08 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
Deliberations resume this morning, after Merchan rereads instructions back to the jurors. Thoughts?
My thoughts are jumbled. I’m truly scared of what might happen if President Trump is convicted of any of these phony charges. I’m also hanging onto hope that the jury will hang.
There is reference to a rain metaphor...pretty stupid example
Judge Merchan has erred on the side of inclusion. There was a subsequent request to add more and he approved it. There is another note from the jury
The jury is asking for instructions on count one and how to deal with evidence and the inference to be drawn from evidence. He will read pages 7-35.
The inference instructions are interesting. It is not the corroboration or perjury material that would have presumably focused on Cohen. However, the inference sections would go to how much that can read into the implications of testimony. Much of Cohen’s testimony did not concretely establish knowledge or intent by Trump but the prosecutors insisted that they could infer from that evidence
Likewise, Pecker’s testimony tied his actions to the election and the question is how much can the jury infer from the accounts of the Trump Tower meeting that Trump knew and approved of this effort
I should have said better than good news. The corroboration and perjury instructions would have suggested that Cohen was the stumbling block. This goes to the question of weight that can be given to these accounts. Notably, they are asking for mostly Pecker’s account but also have a request for a Cohen passage
henry fonda white courtesy phone. henry fonda, white courtesy phone.
It’s an absolute travesty that the Judge won’t provide the jurors the written version his very complicated instructions.
Merchan wants vagary and emotionalism to reign in the jury’s deliberations.
Merchan has put his thumb on the scales of justice in this trial in many ways.
The jury specifically raised the “rain metaphor” in their request for the readback. That metaphor is meant to suggest that observing some facts can confirm the occurrence of other prior facts like seeing umbrellas to show that it has rained. The defense has obviously resisted the sweeping inferences from the prosecution.
The instructions state that you can draw an inference from any fact that is proven. Hence the rain metaphor. If you go to bed that it was not raining, but in the morning you see wet grounds and people carrying umbrellas. However, the inference must not be speculative but a natural conclusion from a previously established fact
https://x.com/JonathanTurley/status/1796178503584366675
You can indeed infer that Cohen's bill would be entered in the books as Legal Services.....no matter what the invoice said. He billed...Trump paid...Trump was much too trusting of that little *****.
Love that movie.
I hope with all my heart that you are right and it is a not guilty verdict on all counts. Oh, and you are 100% accurate in what can be inferred if only the jurors are honest and fair.
Turley
The focus on the inferential instructions is better news in my view for the prosecutors in comparison to a question for the corroboration or false testimony sections. It may indicate that there was some uncertainty or division on how much of a negative inference can be drawn from these accounts in establishing intent and knowledge on the part of Trump.
I’ll tell you exactly what is going on in the jury room. The two lawyers are aware that the no specific crime instructions are an issue. So they are trying to get everyone on the same page to take that uncertainty out of the question. Who ever heard of lawyers on a jury? It does not happen. Trump will be found guilty on all charges. The only question is if he goes to jail immediately or not.
Re-reading 29 of 55 pages of the jury instructions. That’s a boring start of the day.
Merchan is already counting the money he will get from the book, interviews, speeches and the honorary law degess that will be conferred by the sycophants. He may be disappointed.
If a hold-out juror is replaced, that'd be 100% confirmation that this is persecution, not prosecution. The results rigged.
So you don't know if there were other meetings.
Here's a quote from pecker's testimony
Pecker also testified Trump called him about a plan to pay of McDougal, and after Pecker urged him (Trump) to pay McDougal to cover up her allegations, Trump responded, "I don't buy any stories...Any time you do anything like this, it always gets out."
Telling me that Cohen did indeed act on his own
Turley
must confess a certain frustration with the process and I expect that some jurors may have the same reaction. The insistence on only reading the instructions to this jury is so illogical and inefficient in my view. It is like returning the proceedings back to an oral tradition before the advent of writing. It is better than cave drawings but it leaves the matter to the notes of jurors to furiously write down snippets. Why? These instructions were carefully fought over and considered by the judge and counsel. One would think that the interests of justice would be served by having the language before the jury as they deliberated. Instead, they have to have it read to them like toddlers after long delays to come into the courtroom and work out what portions will be read. It is entirely counterintuitive in my view.
Deep State will get the result it wants.
The question will be what do they do after they get what they want.
But you don’t know if it rained all night or began 10 minutes ago.
___
Or if your neighbors turned on their sprinklers overnight
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.