Posted on 06/25/2024 9:17:23 AM PDT by Red Badger
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) delivered two precedent-setting rulings that could significantly impact former President Donald Trump’s criminal convictions.
In a decisive 6-3 decision in the Erlinger vs United States case, the Supreme Court ruled that juries must be unanimous on each criminal count, a standard not met in Trump’s New York case, where the jury returned a 4-4-4 verdict on the underlying crime.
This ruling underlines that Trump’s conviction was unconstitutional and must be overturned. During Trump’s New York trial, the judge had instructed the jury that unanimity on the specific crimes was unnecessary, as long as they agreed that a crime had taken place.
Additionally, SCOTUS ruled that sentencing enhancements cannot be arbitrarily implemented by judicial fiat, further solidifying the protections against unjust legal procedures.
These rulings have profound implications for Trump’s legal battles, particularly the controversial case led by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, and the bogus J6 1512(c) charges and sentencing enhancements that corrupt federal judges have announced they will implement if the Supreme Court nukes 1512(c).
The Supreme Court’s decisions underscore the necessity for unanimous jury verdicts in criminal convictions and proper judicial processes in sentencing enhancements, casting doubt on the validity of current and future proceedings against Trump.
I can’t wait for Mourning Joe’s next show. I may actually watch it. Which would be a first.
“This ruling underlines that President Trump’s conviction was unconstitutional and must be overturned.”
You’ll have a better opinion of democrats than I do.
Trump a “convicted felon”? I think not.
But then, there never was any underlying crime. This was mostly an inane attempt to show Trump in the most salacious light possible.
They were practically calling that before the trial.
So the conclusion of the article (and its title) is that the Erlinger vs US case heard last October leads to tossing of the NY case against Trump. I like that interpretation but I am skeptical is will end NY lawfare and exonerate Trump in the near term.
The news on this decision is slow in coming. Couldn’t find it on Google, Bing, or DuckDuckGo.
I'm taking a wait and see.
There is still the Hotlanta Fani mess, and the Jack-wagon Smith crap left...................
COUNT VERDICT BUSINESS RECORD DATE
1 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust Feb. 14, 2017
2 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, bearing voucher number 842457 Feb. 14, 2017
3 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, bearing voucher number 842460 Feb. 14, 2017
4 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust Account, bearing check number 000138 Feb. 14, 2017
5 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust March 16, 2017
6 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, bearing voucher number 846907 March 17, 2017
7 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust Account, bearing check number 000147 March 17, 2017
8 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump April 13, 2017
9 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 858770 June 19, 2017
10 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump account, bearing check number 002740 June 19, 2017
11 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump May 22, 2017
12 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 855331 May 22, 2017
13 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump account, bearing check number 002700 May 23, 2017
14 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump June 16, 2017
15 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 858772 June 19, 2017
16 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump account, bearing check number 002741 June 19, 2017
17 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump July 11, 2017
18 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 861096 July 11, 2017
19 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump account, bearing check number 002781 July 11, 2017
20 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump Aug. 1, 2017
21 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 863641 Aug. 1, 2017
22 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump account, bearing check number 002821 Aug. 1, 2017
23 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump Sept. 11, 2017
24 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 868174 Sept. 11, 2017
25 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump account, bearing check number 002908 Sept. 12, 2017
26 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump Oct. 18, 2017
27 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 872654 Oct. 18, 2017
28 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump account, bearing check number 002944 Oct. 18, 2017
29 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump Nov. 20, 2017
30 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 876511 Nov. 20, 2017
31 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump account, bearing check number 002980 Nov. 21, 2017
32 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump Dec. 1, 2017
33 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 877785 Dec. 1, 2017
34 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump account, bearing check number 003006 Dec. 5, 2017
https://www.npr.org/2024/05/30/g-s1-1848/trump-hush-money-trial-34-counts
I don’t understand. The link informs us a case decided today and is dated 6/21/24. How is this an old case?
https://x.com/seanmdav/status/1804159968108552545
Not an old case, decision 6/21/24.
Thats not what I was referring to. I am waiting to hear some wise lawyers opinion, but I dont yet share the exuberance of others on the thread who read the headline and jumped to conclusions of fact when all that is offered in the article is opinion.
For Trump, this is an argument that his lawyers can add to his appeals, but its not going to bitch slap Bragg, not yet anyway.
Front page?!
How bloody old are you dude? Even I quit using that term a decade ago and I AM an old fart!
= = = =
Well, we do have the new word, Front Hole.
This was decided last week. How was this not front page news?
When you are going to try a former POTUS you need to have a clean case, a clean process, and a clean judge, and a clean jury. You ‘rig’ it, and it looks politically VERY VERY VERY bad to the public. The media and NYS (who will forever be known as ‘Dirty’ NY from now on) aren’t just going to advertise this. They KNOWINGLY violated Trumps Constitutional rights, and now have embarrassed the entire US Judicial system, for a POLITICAL STUNT. The entire State of NY looks like a Clown Show.
Robert DeNiro was totally and completely wrong, NY State does Elect and Foster the CLOWNS, because it is a complete CLOWN SHOW. The SCOTUS just told them so.
Case was heard in October of last year. Its not a Trump specific case.
what about the other 32 counts.
Knowing that he will be almost certainly overturned, on July 14 Judge Merchan will sentence Trump to prison as his big final FU.
Wow, my mistake... there was a similar case people were citing when Trump was convicted, and the name of this case is also very familiar for some reason.
The headline was obviously hyperbole. If it was true it would confined to this source
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.