A few here on the forum have been saying there is a crime. Yet they never said in their own words with the crime was. Now the judge agrees with me, that there is no set crime, The judge makes things up as he goes along. He has surprised both sides with a statement to the jury that there may be Several crimes. It is mind-boggling how many reversible errors are being made in this court, and just as many from the judge himself..
The judge has in effect sustained everything everything That I have been saying. He apparently has not heard marauder and sun house.
Glad to help y’all along. Unfortunately, the judge is saying everything he can to make a true verdict impossible.
@AverageJoe1 saidThe Judge is following the law as defined in the NY Penal Law. Section 175.10 only requires an " intent to commit another crime"; it does not require the jury to agree what the other crime was. Merchan gave the same jury instruction given in literally hundreds of other cases involving this section of NY Penal Law.
A few here on the forum have been saying there is a crime. Yet they never said in their own words with the crime was. Now the judge agrees with me, that there is no set crime, The judge makes things up as he goes along. He has surprised both sides with a statement to the jury that there may be Several crimes. It is mind-boggling how many reversible errors are being made ...[text shortened]... ll along. Unfortunately, the judge is saying everything he can to make a true verdict impossible.
Sorry, if Donald Trump isn't getting special treatment.
@no1marauder saidThere you go again. We all recall that you laughed at me when I asked 'what is the crime?'
The Judge is following the law as defined in the NY Penal Law. Section 175.10 only requires an " intent to commit another crime"; it does not require the jury to agree what the other crime was. Merchan gave the same jury instruction given in literally hundreds of other cases involving this section of NY Penal Law.
Sorry, if Donald Trump isn't getting special treatment.
Even the judge ( who sustained every one of the prosecution objections) had to have a convoluted charge to the jury....It is something like giving them any choices that they can come up with , maybe 4 people for crime A, 4 for Crime B, and 4 for Crime C.....and he TOPS IT OFF by suggesting that any one of the 3 findings could be applied to all 12 as a whole. They can agree even if the they disagree with the underlying crime! "You need not be unanimous"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Marauder, Suzieanne told us you are a lawyer, and I know you have a NexLex, so how can you stand by with this crapp. Never mind, I can't communicate with a Bot.
You really want to nail President Trump's ass, don't you. I don';t know one person who wants to nail his ass. Sonhouse does, but I do not know Sonhouse.
No sense writing about today's facts which are out there for all to see, you are getting what you want, I do not know how he can get around that, guilty may be the verdict with this TREMENDOUS help of the judge, just like that smiling loser judge who fined him $400M.
Everyone, please step and back and reallize what is going on.
Jury Does Not Have to Agree On Crime.
What? If Trump is found guilty, the SCOTUS should take this up as an emergency just on this one point, this one subjective decision of a judge.
The election hangs in the balance, as does the country. Know that if Biden does win, he will simply .....fall asleep. He has filled his bucket list. Hell, he is not going to run, anyway. What a mess.
The post that was quoted here has been removedThere was not a first crime. Marauder wrote thirty emails of links trying, but failing, to tell us the crime. He never can put things in his own words. (Suzianne says he is a lawyer, I do not know how she knows that, he seems more like a paralegal with access to a NexisLexis). Instead, he attached links and posted stuff that never named the crime.
So this judge confirmed that there was no crime, by coming up with a gambit to say there could be several crimes, and for the jurors to pick the one that suits them. He made things up, to get Trump convicted.
There was no crime. I was right, M was wrong. Leading Forum-ers astray!!
@no1marauder saidSee what I mean??
Step 1: Google "NY Penal Law 175.10".
Step 2: Read it.
We can go from there.
@AverageJoe1 saidIt is mind-boggling how many reversible errors are being made in this court, and just as many from the judge himself..
A few here on the forum have been saying there is a crime. Yet they never said in their own words with the crime was. Now the judge agrees with me, that there is no set crime, The judge makes things up as he goes along. He has surprised both sides with a statement to the jury that there may be Several crimes. It is mind-boggling how many reversible errors are being made ...[text shortened]... ll along. Unfortunately, the judge is saying everything he can to make a true verdict impossible.
I'm sure with all your years of legal scholarship and trial experience, you're qualified to tell us this. 😴
@mchill saidGolly, I thought my opening post had smatterings of a lawyer........
It is mind-boggling how many reversible errors are being made in this court, and just as many from the judge himself..
I'm sure with all your years of legal scholarship and trial experience, you're qualified to tell us this. 😴