Posted on 02/17/2022 7:41:24 PM PST by ChicagoConservative27
CNN chief legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin said Thursday on “The Situation Room” that if former President Donald Trump and his children Ivanka and Don Jr. plead the Fifth when testifying in the civil suit by the state of New York, the jury could draw an “adverse inference.”
Anchor Wolf Blitzer said, “Former President Trump and his kids argued that sitting for a deposition would violate, they say, their constitutional rights; this judge certainly disagreed. What do you make of this ruling?”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Is that what Loobin Toobin says?
Go f yourself, Toobin
Oh, wait.
I do not believe this.
“No Amendment is absolute!” /sarc
Why do they need President Trump on the stand?
You either have the goods on something or you do not.
Trump has nothing to say to these communists.
They need Trump to distract everyone from Geriatric Joe’s failures.
They have nothing positive to even attempt to claim from this administration.
Toobin needs to get a hold of himself.
Was he starting to breath heavily as he reached his conclusion?
He fits right in at CNN pervert network 🤪
Hilarious
It’s “The Situation Room” - Loobin has got the situation well in hand...
Very good point - this is all Kabuki theater
Oh he does often.......
It’s football all over again.
They are getting their ass kicked because they are communist totalitarians.
They respond with a quick kick on 3rd down.
We will catch it and move forward.
feh...
They are salivating at the prospect of getting Trump to give oral testimony since he has a habit of rambling and they hope he wanders off into something they can make something of. (i.e. let him talk himself into some trouble, makes a fishing trip much easier.)
Toobin knows this.
Setting up the narrative for the below 90 bell curve folks.
Toobin is a clown, but there is an abundance of case law on permissible adverse inferences in a civil case when someone invokes the 5th.
“It is well-established that when a witness invokes the Fifth Amendment in a civil action the Court may draw an adverse inference against that party.” See El-Dehdan v El-Dehdan, 114 AD3d 4, 978 N.Y.S.2d 239 [2d Dept., 2013].
The New York Court of Appeals has held that drawing the adverse inference against a party based on invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege is “...akin to that arising when a party fails or refuses to produce a material witness who is within his control...” Marine Midland Bank v John E. Russo Produce Co., Inc., 50 NY2d 31, 42, 405 N.E.2d 205, 427 NYS2d 961 (1980).
Also look at SEC v. Susman, 2010 WL 532060, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 11, 2010).
See also, NY Pattern Jury Instruction 1:76 “From the assertion of the privilege you may infer, if you deem it proper to do so, that had the answers been given they would not have contradicted the opposing evidence on the issue of [identify issue] or would not have supported (the defendant’s, plaintiff’s) position on that issue and you may, although you are not required to, draw the strongest inference against the (plaintiff, defendant) on that question that the opposing evidence permits [emphasis added].”
Why would they take the fifth? There’s nothing there.
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.