Can Merchan’s wrongs now be used as precedent, as long as they continue to stand without rebuke from a higher court?
I’ve been thinking about the guy who claimed on the court FB page that his cousin was a juror and said - before the verdict was announced - that they were going to indict Trump. If that guy’s relationship to a juror was confirmed it should result in a mistrial. And now I wonder if that would have any impact on whether his rulings can be precedent for others.
Can federal crimes now be tried in state courts? Can defendants be left not knowing what specific crimes they have supposedly committed? Can defendants be gagged while their accusers can say whatever they want? Can jurors be asked to decide what crime the defendant committed - while experts on the particular crimes possible are not allowed to testify about what constitutes that crime?
These are questions that I believe need to be asked, and deserve answers.
A lower court ruling is not binding precedent.