These instructions are truly absurd. First, Trump has to be convicted of a predicate crime before the NY case can proceed. Even if that is not true, there has to be unanimity on what the jurors perceive as the predicate crime. If 4 jurors think that Trump is guilty of a predicate crime, that means 8 jurors disagree.
DOH! Rule of law. We musta forgot. As usual, democommie/proglibs only apply laws they like or agree with. Everything else? NOT their problem.
“These instructions are truly absurd. First, Trump has to be convicted of a predicate crime before the NY case can proceed. Even if that is not true, there has to be unanimity on what the jurors perceive as the predicate crime. If 4 jurors think that Trump is guilty of a predicate crime, that means 8 jurors disagree.”
This is a common but completely false troupe around here. There is nothing in the statute requiring conviction of an underlying crime. There’s nothing in the statute that even requires the defendant to be the one committing the underlying crime, or even requires the EXISTENCE of an underlying crime. If I cook corporate books because you’re going to embezzle funds and I want to hide it, but then you chicken out and don’t do it, I’d still be guilty of the felony falsification of business records because it was my intent to cover up a crime.
All that the jurors are allowed to disagree on is which specific crime they believe Trump was trying to hide. All 12 have to still believe he was hiding A crime.