In general I still think yes. But I haven’t had time to totally digest what was shared. Or see any reasoned counter points.
The point of posting material on this forum is for people to read it.
If you won't digest my material, but come here and still assert it was a fair trial, then you are being willfully ignorant... as a rabid liberal tends to do.
I have a lawyer friend who does not participate in this forum. He reviewed my work, and told me that except for one assertion, I was right on point. He told me I should be an attorney.
I almost became one.
And in that one post you showed more consideration for the truth than Merchan allowed the jurors access to do.
The only reason the bookkeeping issues weren’t buried by statute of limitations is because there was supposedly an intent by Trump to commit or hide some other crime. But what that crime might be was only brought up by the prosecution in the summation AFTER the defense’s chance to give any “reasoned counter points” was already past. Merchan had already refused to let a subject expert testify about it.
That alone should tell you how bad this was. Counter points with time to digest them. A juror should be able to expect at least that much. Not in Merchan’s court though.