Trump's Conviction and the 6th Amendment.

[Pogo]

That is the point. Thank you. No one knows but the jury, not even the defendant.

And it is not relevant to anyone except the individual jurors as you would know if you read the law and the jury instructions. Trump is not the jurors, so he cannot know what is in their heads nor is there any requirement for them to explain it to others. Sorry that you don't like it but dem's da rulz.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

And it is not relevant to anyone except the individual jurors as you would know if you read the law and the jury instructions. Trump is not the jurors, so he cannot know what is in their heads nor is there any requirement for them to explain it to others. Sorry that you don't like it but dem's da rulz.

What does it hurt for Trump to actually know what he was convicted of doing?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

What does it hurt for Trump to actually know what he was convicted of doing?

You can read the notes about the law and the reason behind the rules. But I doubt they have anything to do with Trump as Trump.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

The statue of limitations on the misdemeanor had expired. They had to say he concealed other crime so they could bump it to a felony so they could get around the statute of limitations on the misdemeanor being expired to even charge him..

But he didn't commit a misdemeanor. The payments were a felony from their inception, since they were originally devised to cover up another crime.

Those others crimes don't have to be proven or even Trump charged with them.

But a jury did need to be convinced that he committed them or intended to commit them. The prosecution made the case that the payments were made to influence the outcome of the election. Pecker and Cohen both testified to that. Hill testified that he had similar motives regarding payments to Karen McDougall, and that his campaign chances were what preoccupied him after the release of the Access Hollywood tapes.

But yes, it was quite clever of Bragg to turn that into thirty-four felony convictions. And there may have been an element of revenge there. I can't say there wasn't. Trump has made enemies everywhere, especially in New York. How many of those contractors and workers that he's stiffed in the past do you think were cheering the verdicts? What's Trump said and done to offend Bragg personally? If that's part of this, so be it. Trump still got a fair trial and a unanimous verdict.

What does it hurt for Trump to actually know what he was convicted of doing?

It doesn't as best I can see.

But how would it help? Imagine a list with each juror listing every crime they thought Trump was covering up with those payments. Their lists could all look the same or be different. You'd have your answer, and it would change nothing.

But Trump's not entitled to those answers, so he'll have to surmise.

 

[Pogo]

What does it hurt for Trump to actually know what he was convicted of doing?

That is not at all your question, you are asking what specifically was the jurors thought process, all that is required is that the jurors swore that they did think about the things they were instructed to and concluded that they happened beyond a reasonable doubt in their minds.

Why should you or Trump assume that he or you should get special treatment.

If the jurors want to write memoirs that's fine, then he might even find out, but it is not relevant to the outcome otherwise.

 

[F1fan]

Then please tell me by what means Trump committed the crime if it is so apparent.

I'm not sure why you are struggling with this. This has been answered by other members. Could it be that you just don;t want it to be true, and you are in denial? It's like trying to explain evolution to a creationist.

Answer me this:

Do you have legal expertise?

Do you understand New York laws that applied to Trump's case?

Have you understood the series of events from:
Trump's affair with Stormy Daniels (as Melania had just given birth to Barron),
to his decision to run for president,
to the Access Hollywood video being released in the summer of 2016,
to the 2016 Trump campaign freakout over this,
to many republicans demanding Trump pull out of the election,
to the story about the Stormy Daniels affair coming to light as a story for sale in September 2016,
to Trump and Cohen working to buy the story and pay off Stormy (election interferance),
to David pecker of the National Enquirer being involved in the hush money payment, (illegal campaign fraud)
to Cohen being pressured to pay the money because Trump is delaying it in hopes that the election will happen first (this was early October 2016),
to Cohen taking out a home equity loan for $130,000 to pay Daniels,
to there being a conspiracy to pay back Cohen with a payment plan that is falsely recorded as legal work (business record keeping fraud),
to 12 payments of around $30,000 each to pay back Cohen, which totalled about $420,000 as the 130K was recorded as income and $130,000 had to cover the taxes (tax fraud), plus a bonus for his trouble,
to Trump delaying payments to Cohen after he won the electoral college vote,
to Trump signing the payback checks to Cohen in the White House,
to the Trump DOJ filing charges against Cohen,
to Cohen being a cooperating witness for the DOJ,
to Trump and Bill Barr trying to coerse Cohen not to talk about his dealings with Trump, violating his First Amendment rights,
to which Cohen refuses and was taken back to prison,
to charges against Trump and others discussed in 2021-2023,
to charges finally being presented to a grnad jury,
to an indictment being filed against Trump,
to Trump's trial,
to Trump's 34 guilty verdicts of the crimes listed above.

There were a set of misdemeanor crimes, but that fact they were committed for the sake of election interferance made them felonies, and a longer statute of limitations applied. Conspiracies to commit a crime are also felonies, which Cohen had been charged with himself with co-consirator 1, who was Trump.

 

[F1fan]

That is the point. Thank you. No one knows but the jury, not even the defendant.

Well in the defendant's defense, he's a total moron who is clearly having mental problems. Is it his age, or is it the stress of his four criminal indictments, or the trial? Or is it all the crimes coming back to haunt him?

Is it his uncertainty of being able to lie enough to convince swing voters to elect him? He clearly has many judges on his side delaying justice, but if he loses they won't be able to delay the cases any further.

 

[Twilight Hue]

It’s actually not weird at all in a case like this.

Maybe, but to not see a single not guilty found anywhere in such a long list is arguably red flag territory, that everyone speaking in unison and with one voice, doesn't come across as being atypical when compared to other cases with a considerably long list of levied charges against a defendant.

 

[Pogo]

Maybe, but to not see a single not guilty found anywhere in such a long list is arguably red flag territory, that everyone speaking in unison and with one voice, doesn't come across as being atypical when compared to other cases with a considerably long list of levied charges against a defendant.

Why, are you so ignorant of the actual case that you don't understand that it was multiple parts of a single event that are charged separately as that is the convention and because of this, the sentences are not served sequentially but concurrently.

Try this idea, Abner Money Pockets embezzled a million dollars from his company, but not all at once, but by 34 separate transactions in one year by one method.
Do you expect 34 different judgments because each falsification of the books might be a little different or 34 guiltys because the embezzlement took 34 individual similar actions to accomplish.

Think beyond your desire for your orange idol.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Why, are you so ignorant of the actual case that you don't understand that it was multiple parts of a single event that are charged separately as that is the convention and because of this, the sentences are not served sequentially but concurrently.

Try this idea, Abner Money Pockets embezzled a million dollars from his company, but not all at once, but by 34 separate transactions in one year by one method.
Do you expect 34 different judgments because each falsification of the books might be a little different or 34 guiltys because the embezzlement took 34 individual similar actions to accomplish.

Think beyond your desire for your orange idol.

I'll just wait to see the determination made by the appellate court on the matter.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Maybe, but to not see a single not guilty found anywhere in such a long list is arguably red flag territory, that everyone speaking in unison and with one voice, doesn't come across as being atypical when compared to other cases with a considerably long list of levied charges against a defendant.

I am 100% convinced that if that jury unanimously decided on "not guilty," you wouldn't question it for a moment. The only suspect judgements are the ones you don't like, is that it?

 

[Twilight Hue]

I am 100% convinced that if that jury unanimously decided on "not guilty," you wouldn't question it for a moment. The only suspect judgements are the ones you don't like, is that it?

Well that would be your job then.

 

[Pogo]

I'll just wait to see the determination made by the appellate court on the matter.

Why do you think they might find otherwise in regards to Abner Money Pockets, or DJT in this analogous case?

Never mind, we know, you just want to kick the can down the road to maintain your tiny little doubt justification for a position you really know is absurd.
It is your M.O.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Why do you think they might find otherwise in regards to Abner Money Pockets, or DJT in this analogous case?

Never mind, we know, you just want to kick the can down the road to maintain your tiny little doubt justification for a position you really know is absurd.
It is your M.O.

No. But you clearly dismiss my already multiple posts where my stance is, that it's not over until the fat lady sings.

 

[Pogo]

No. But you clearly dismiss my already multiple posts where my stance is, that it's not over until the fat lady sings.

Reflect on why you pretend that attitude in particular cases.

 

[Copernicus]

I'll just wait to see the determination made by the appellate court on the matter.

One of the many oddities of the New York justice system is that Merchan is a supreme court justice, but his jurisdiction is only county-wide. The Court of Appeals is actually the court that would be called the "supreme court" in other states. So the Court of Appeals has the final say in the matter. If Trump loses there, his only hope would be a pardon from a NY state governor, and that would not be Governor Hochul. She has pretty much endorsed the result of Trump's trial. And it doesn't look likely that the Court of Appeals will reverse the conviction, although it remains to be seen whether they tweak any other details of the case. Merchan is considered a very competent and fair judge, so there won't be many good issues to base an appeal on. Trump did everything he could to disrupt and delay the trial, but Merchan managed to handle his tactics very well. The problem for Trump is that he and his antics are very familiar to New Yorkers.

I doubt that Merchan will penalize Trump with much jail time, if any, although the man deserves every day of a four-year prison term, IMO. Trump is more likely to face probation, fines, and other penalties. As a convicted felon, he will lose some civil rights, although unfortunately not the right to run for the US presidency. He will be ineligible to run for state offices in some states, but the last thing on Trump's mind is public service. It's all about him. The presidency is a ticket to wealth and revenge on his enemies.

 

[Pogo]

One of the many oddities of the New York justice system is that Merchan is a supreme court justice, but his jurisdiction is only county-wide. The Court of Appeals is actually the court that would be called the "supreme court" in other states. So the Court of Appeals has the final say in the matter. If Trump loses there, his only hope would be a pardon from a NY state governor, and that would not be Governor Hochul. She has pretty much endorsed the result of Trump's trial. And it doesn't look likely that the Court of Appeals will reverse the conviction, although it remains to be seen whether they tweak any other details of the case. Merchan is considered a very competent and fair judge, so there won't be many good issues to base an appeal on. Trump did everything he could to disrupt and delay the trial, but Merchan managed to handle his tactics very well. The problem for Trump is that he and his antics are very familiar to New Yorkers.

I doubt that Merchan will penalize Trump with much jail time, if any, although the man deserves every day of a four-year prison term, IMO. Trump is more likely to face probation, fines, and other penalties. As a convicted felon, he will lose some civil rights, although unfortunately not the right to run for the US presidency. He will be ineligible to run for state offices in some states, but the last thing on Trump's mind is public service. It's all about him. The presidency is a ticket to wealth and revenge on his enemies.

We will add to that that Scotus cannot and will not review the NYS apellate courts decision for anything except a constitutional reason and NYS has not sent many cases to the SC for unconstitutionality of longstanding laws, or due process violations.

Yes, you can kick the can down the road on the basis of hope, but being realistic would be much better for your long term mental health.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Maybe, but to not see a single not guilty found anywhere in such a long list is arguably red flag territory, that everyone speaking in unison and with one voice, doesn't come across as being atypical when compared to other cases with a considerably long list of levied charges against a defendant.

Why? Why should there be a a not guilty verdict when all of the evidence points towards Trump's guilt. You are sounding like a creationist who complains that all of the evidence supports evolution.

 

[Subduction Zone]

One of the many oddities of the New York justice system is that Merchan is a supreme court justice, but his jurisdiction is only county-wide. The Court of Appeals is actually the court that would be called the "supreme court" in other states. So the Court of Appeals has the final say in the matter. If Trump loses there, his only hope would be a pardon from a NY state governor, and that would not be Governor Hochul. She has pretty much endorsed the result of Trump's trial. And it doesn't look likely that the Court of Appeals will reverse the conviction, although it remains to be seen whether they tweak any other details of the case. Merchan is considered a very competent and fair judge, so there won't be many good issues to base an appeal on. Trump did everything he could to disrupt and delay the trial, but Merchan managed to handle his tactics very well. The problem for Trump is that he and his antics are very familiar to New Yorkers.

I doubt that Merchan will penalize Trump with much jail time, if any, although the man deserves every day of a four-year prison term, IMO. Trump is more likely to face probation, fines, and other penalties. As a convicted felon, he will lose some civil rights, although unfortunately not the right to run for the US presidency. He will be ineligible to run for state offices in some states, but the last thing on Trump's mind is public service. It's all about him. The presidency is a ticket to wealth and revenge on his enemies.

New York State has different nomenclature than other states. It is not "weird" because in other states Merchan would have a title that matched the nomenclature used there. In my state he would be a District Court Judge. You should not let such a minor matter throw you. In New York State the "Court of Appeals" would be the equivalent of my states "State Supreme Court". Just different terms for the same jobs.

 

[Laniakea]

Well in the defendant's defense, he's a total moron who is clearly having mental problems. Is it his age, or is it the stress of his four criminal indictments, or the trial? Or is it all the crimes coming back to haunt him?

Now you are making the case that he was incompetent to stand trial.
Not a good look after you just got through laying out how you believe all the facts of the case fit together.