Trump verdict in

mchammer said:
So says the man that has never seen or observed prosecutorial abuse up close and personal (friend, family member, etc). In the example that I am aware of, the verdict was overturned upon appeal in very short order.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying court decisions or prosecutions are never wrongful and subject to reversal. It's just saying the procedures are not so complicated you need a lawyer or a political interpreter to critically examine the facts and the law.
 
Crockett said:
I'm not saying court decisions or prosecutions are never wrongful and subject to reversal. It's just saying the procedures are not so complicated you need a lawyer or a political interpreter to critically examine the facts and the law.
Click to expand...

You just contradicted your original statement.
 
Crockett said:
I'm not saying court decisions or prosecutions are never wrongful and subject to reversal. It's just saying the procedures are not so complicated you need a lawyer or a political interpreter to critically examine the facts and the law.
Click to expand...
Okay. I am happy to wait out the appeals process.
 
Nobody had ever before been charged under state law for violating federal campaign laws, and prosecutors never even tried to prove the central element of the charge: that Trump created false business records with intent to use them to defraud someone.

There was no evidence that the private records were ever meant to see the light of day.

Dems fearing Trump's 'retribution' have themselves to blame
 
Wow. I thought the unanimous requirement was standard for conviction. Shows how much I know but never claimed to be a lawyer. Never even played one on tv.
 
Last edited:
mchammer said:
Click to expand...


It is a significant help to Trump, but there is a viable argument the other way. The Trump verdict was unanimous on the existence of each element of the alleged crime. The disagreement was over the specifics of how the crime was committed. That's a somewhat different issue than what occured in Erlinger. Let's put it this way. The liberal justices who joined the majority on Erlinger will NOT join such a majority if Trump is a party to the case.
 
New theory is that the sentencing was delayed to have maximum impact on voting.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict TEXAS-KENTUCKY *
Sat, Nov 23 • 2:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top