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?
Lol, I’d say.
Are you saying that Jurors 1, 2, 3, and 4 only could vote on all three of the charges to make up the 12 votes and it would be a conviction ???
But all 34 charges will be read out in court and the decision from each rendered
If it’s 4 to 8 how will he be guilty ???
What if the defense wants each of the jurors to announce personally if they agree with the verdict ???
But maybe the judge won’t allow the jury to be asked
Apparently anything goes in a NY court
You’re welcome, Sidebar Moderator.
Here are a couple new President Trump Truths while we wait:
Does anybody ask why the Government, under Soros backed District Attorney, Alvin Bragg, failed to bring in a Long List of Witnesses that they so viciously threatened everybody with? I’m not allowed to say the names BECAUSE OF THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL GAG ORDER THAT I AM UNDER, but there are plenty. The prosecutors didn’t use them because these people would have been very bad for the Government’s Case! But remember, this is all under the auspices of the DOJ and White House, for the purpose of Election Interference - These are the Thugs and Monsters who are destroying our Country.
Will Scharf: “A misdemeanor under this business records fraud statute would have been time barred here, it would have been past the statute of limitations. Alvin Bragg’s team has essentially converted alleged misdemeanor offenses by claiming that the business records fraud was intended to cover up an underlying illegality. It’s a very novel use of the statute. We’re in somewhat unprecedented legal territory here in terms of the use of this particular statute.”
We’ll know soon enough. But I suspect there are at least two hard “not guilty” jurors after the Cohen debacle. But who knows.
IOW, at this point, it’s gotta be more than just one juror holding out, or he or she would have folded.
It is definitely confusing and risks gaming. Say four jurists vote for each of the underlying charges, thus 12 votes from the three even while the other 8 jurors say no. Makes a joke of the court, of this judge.
More reversible error.
It’s cya. If this ends up with a hung jury, he can shift the blame onto the jurors for not understanding his “clear” instructions. Same if they acquit. If they convict, he’ll obviously take all the credit.
I’ve been praying that there would be 3 who are of sane mind and that they would be given supernatural strength, wisdom, clarity, and endurance. The hope is that when one gets tired another can take his/her place in the deliberations for a while.
Being in that deliberation room has to be like fighting with 8 trolls here on FR. It always ends up in the same points being given and refuted, and ultimately ends up in mud-slinging at each other. Whoever is fighting with the rabid anti-Trumpers is gonna need all the prayers they can get. God have mercy on all of us!
>> He doesn’t care if he’s fired/disbarred
Probably not. There are other forms of justice beside those, however. Including some administered by an omnipotent Judge.
Excellent analysis.
I’ve never had an NDA expense but I do wonder in hindsight if I’ve always put expenses into the correct categories. Glad I no longer live in New York state. Even so, should I expect some zealous prosecutor going over my accounting entries and charging me for using the wrong category?
🙏I join you in that prayer! 🙏
Yes, he was sentenced to five months in April.
https://apnews.com/article/weisselberg-trump-perjury-new-york-b76cde56c6cb983ab8789f95d5a0c6c0
Thanks for posting, FRiend.
He did it in the jury instructions, pg 31.
"By Unlawful Means" Although you must conclude unanimously that the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you need not be unanimous as to what those unlawful means were. In determining whether the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you may consider the following: (1) violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act otherwise known as FECA; (2) the falsification of other business records; or (3) violation of tax laws. THE FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT The first of the People's theories of “unlawful means" which I will now define for you is the Federal Election Campaign Act. Under the Federal Election Campaign Act, it is unlawful for an individual to willfully make a contribution to any candidate with respect to any election for federal office, including the office of President of the United States, which exceeds a certain limit. In 2015 and 2016, that limit was $2,700. It is also unlawful under the Federal Election Campaign Act for any corporation to willfully make a contribution of any amount to a candidate or candidate's campaign in connection with any federal election, or for any person to cause such a corporate contribution. For purposes of these prohibitions, an expenditure made in cooperation, consultation, or concert with, or at the request or suggestion of, a candidate or his agents shall be considered to be a contribution to such candidate. Page 31
Laying this out as a FEC violation, and a crime, without Trump having been convicted, or even charged with such a crime is ridiculous. Add in that the Judge blocked a former FEC Commissioner from testifying with regard to the criminality of Trump's actions is a travesty.
Yes, accountant testified that Trump did not tell him how to log the payments or voucher.
If the votes are secret and by writing guilty or not guilty on a piece of paper nobody will know who’s voting what
But the trolly jurors will probably insist on a hand vote so that they can abuse and threaten the honest/fair ones into changing their minds
I’m joining you also in that prayer!!! May it be so Heavenly Father... we look to YOU!!!
That agreement says something to the effect of “other than in legal proceedings such as subpoenaed, etc.” It is sort of an NDA, or agreement not to go out giving interviews or writing books to cash in.
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.