Posted on 05/29/2024 9:26:39 PM PDT by where's_the_Outrage?
Trump has debuted a new line of attack in his criminal trial.
"I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE CHARGES ARE IN THIS RIGGED CASE," he wrote on Truth Social.
Prosecutors charged Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree over a year ago. The jurors in former President Donald Trump's criminal trial are thinking deeply about the charges.
After just a few hours of deliberating Wednesday, they asked the judge to read back four crucial segments of the testimony they heard.
They honed in on sections that indicate they could be seeking to understand granular details of the plot to keep Stormy Daniels silent ahead of the 2016 presidential election about a sexual tryst she says she had with Trump. Trump, meanwhile, has brought a new line of attack against the proceedings: He says he doesn't know what's going on.
"I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE CHARGES ARE IN THIS RIGGED CASE—I AM ENTITLED TO SPECIFICITY JUST LIKE ANYONE ELSE," he posted on Truth Social after jurors began deliberating. "THERE IS NO CRIME!"
The New York district attorney's office charged Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree over a year ago.
Over the course of more than a month, Trump sat through testimony from 20 witnesses and a five-hour closing argument from prosecutor Joshua Steinglass, laying out the case.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Was this done?
“Business Insider”. Enough said.
It’s a violation of the Sixth Amendment.
The defendant must know the charges against him.
The Prosecution had to meet with Merchan ex-parte and they decided the felony charge would be a shape shifter. They would keep it from Trump’s team and thus he would be unable to present expert witnesses to demonstrate his innocence.
At the end, Merchan tells the Jury the second Charge (felony) can be any number of things, whatever you feel good with personally, and the next Juror can believe he’s not guilty of that crime but can be comfortable with another Crime - all in order to get Trump.
There were a number of charges.
If 1/12 of the jurors thought he was guilty of a different
crime, there could be 12/12 thinking he broke the law, but
only one thinking he had broken any certain crime.
That’s enough to convict? Seriously?
This judge is lost in space.
Business Insider has nothing to do with Business. It is just a leftist rag. Laura Italiano? WTH? Were her mom and dad hippies that liked dancing to Rosemary Clooney or something?
Not required, at least in CA state court. I can tomato e a judge having that conversation. First, almost all defendants are represented by the public defend a to private counsel. Second, for the rare self-represented party it would be very difficult to have that conversation without him endangering g his 5th amendment rights by wa ting to discuss the facts
He had transgressed “The Unwritten Law”
“The justices rule that this decision violated the defendants’ Sixth Amendment right to know ALL the charges against them so they can put on a complete defense.”
Historical SCOTUS Ruling
My argument is in regard to hiding the second charge.
Merchan decides the Law, and it’s what gets Trump convicted. The NY appeals court has been encouraging him. They are Trump Haters.
A Reversal post Election doesn’t help politically.
Merchan violated Trump’s Sixth Amendment rights three ways to Sunday.
Another violation:
“to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor”
He was prohibited from calling witnesses in his favor regarding Election and Campaign Finance Law.
From watching TV and seeing the defendent fall asleep on occasion, I kept wondering is this a strategy, or is he so unconcerned with the outcome he is not drinking enough coffee to stay awake. In a complex trial is is certainly difficult to keep track of everything if you are not wide awake.
I saw a presentation of the instructions to the Jury, and while complex, they seemed clear as presented. I presume the defendent was in the room when these instructions were given. They included several dozen specific charges, and 3 different aspects that needed to be considered while making conclusions about guilt or innocence regarding each of these charges. I’m sure the defendent’s lawyers took extensive notes, or received transcripts of these instructions and can make them clear to their client. The jury has been asking the Judge to clarify some of these items.
This wasn’t on TV.
There’s a lot of unwritten laws in leftist land…
New? He’s been complaining (justifiably) about this all along.
I am not a lawyer, but I was under the impression all Americans are assumed to be innocent until proven guilty. And since Trump was not even charged much less found guilty of a federal campaign crime, how can that be used to make this book keeping item into a felony?
Spin? What spin?
That is not a new spin; Bragg said on the day of the indictment that he did not have to identify a crime.
He’s right. The “Judge’s instructions” are a legal fallacy. The End.
Praying praying praying that the jurors will hear and understand facts and truth today. They’re not sequestered, so there’s a chance they’ll be exposed to just one little thing that will convince them to do the right thing.
And why doesn’t our side dox and threaten jurors the way the left does? We’re always too nice to fight fire with fire.
How did you see it? The kangaroo court prohibited TV cameras in court, IIRC.
???
Maybe you watched “the defendant” fall asleep, and, the judge give his instructions “presentation” in your sleep. Or, maybe it was an old Perry Mason episode.
As others have said, this sham show hasn’t been televised.
🙃
Or, maybe you’re a juror. 🤔🙃
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.