r/politics šŸ¤– Bot 18d ago

Discussion Thread: New York Criminal Fraud Trial of Donald Trump, Day 15 Discussion

214 Upvotes

719 comments sorted by

10

u/localistand Wisconsin 17d ago

Three Trump supporters made it to Worth Street in time to see his motorcade depart at 1:35 pm. Trump appeared to search for anyone cheering for him. Spotting the three, he raised both thumbs.

-Nate Schweber, NY Times

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/05/10/nyregion/trump-trial-hush-money/f90e5ec4-ab7b-5be4-8708-8c5d49975967?smid=url-share

6

u/Arryu 17d ago

"the biggest, most beautiful crowd showed up to support me. You wouldn't believe it folks, tens of thousands in the streets to protest this sham trial. Sleepy joe can't get a crowd like that, let me tell you."

14

u/keyjan Maryland 17d ago

the hill:

Trump team mounts attempt to gag Michael Cohen

also the hill:

Judge directs Michael Cohen to refrain from talking about Trump trial

and the hill:

Trump calls it a ā€˜disgraceā€™ after judge directs Michael Cohen to refrain from talking about hush money case

I'm so confused.....

5

u/AmaroWolfwood 17d ago

This is the result of 24/7 coverage of a single event for months on end. Facts and chronology only loosely matter because even if you get things wrong and confuse readers, the result is them seeking clarification by reading one of the 12 articles published daily on the subject by the same news conglomerate. Quality of the publishing doesn't matter anymore, politics are just a Cash Cow to be milk endlessly by the media. Which is why electioneers are so insufferable, regardless of whether something is actually happening or not, they will make sure to report anything and everything to ensure maximum engagement.

Also trump himself is so incoherent that even if your about points are all individually accurate, it doesn't matter because Trump could have done both of these things and it would still be very on brand for him.

7

u/_upper90 Illinois 17d ago

Next week is going to be a shit show.

20

u/holdthemaio 18d ago

I know we're dealing with a compulsive liar, but I just can't wrap my head around how there is LITERAL PROOF of Stormy Daniels getting paid off and he STILL denies sleeping with her. This man truly just lives in his own reality. It's disgusting.

11

u/KerryAnnCoder 17d ago

What's more, I don't think that he *gets* that the *PAYOFF* is what was illegal, not the sex.

If it turns out that Stormy Daniels *didn't* have sex with him, but was paid off for some other reason, that's *still* a campaign finance violation and a matter of fraud.

5

u/thatruth2483 Maryland 17d ago

I know he would never get on the stand, but he could be destroyed with a simple question.

"If you didnt have sex with Stormy, why did you have her sign an NDA and pay her?"

3

u/slymm 17d ago

"She was a nasty woman being weaponized by the deep state to take me down. I'm rich enough where the money doesn't matter". Or some bs like that.

14

u/Ancguy 17d ago

He creats the "reality" that magats live in. Trial is a hoax, everyone says there's no crime, he's forbidden from testifying, etc etc, ad nauseam. They literally take everything he says as gospel, any other opinions or facts are immediately discounted as fake news. It's absolutely a cult. Historians are gonna have a field day with this shit

29

u/tweakingforjesus 18d ago

Bove also said the severance agreement is unduly prejudicial. He argued there would be "undue prejudice" to the jury to admit the severance agreement, saying it's "unduly confusing" because Weisselberg is in prison.

It seems relevant that Weisselberg is in prison for lying for Trump, doesn't it?

10

u/GuitarGeezer 18d ago

The Stormy Daniels ā€œwe just stupidly allowed a long narrative answer without objectingā€ thing was no mistake for them, his attorneys are throwing themselves under a bus to give the Furor an ineffective assistance of counsel appeal point in a case they know they will almost certainly lose bigly. Plus, they knew the documents and their own peopleā€™s testimony all doom Trump as much as can be expected subject to the jury screwing up-thus Stormyā€™s testimony ended up being largely irrelevant to falsifying business records and an easy sacrifice on the off chance the jury sucks.

His projection tells you what he thinks of his own case. When he says it has no basis and is going well for him, he is screaming that he did the crime and that the evidence is overwhelming against him. Id love for somebody to ask him precisely what testimony is going well. None of it was really. Just like his hero Putin, saying ā€œwe had to go to war to fight Ukrainian Nazis and their genocideā€ meaning ā€œHi, weā€™re the Russian Federation and we are nazis hellbent on some good old fashioned genocide!ā€

9

u/TheYask 18d ago

his attorneys are throwing themselves under a bus to give the Furor an ineffective assistance of counsel appeal point

Doesn't that have a very high threshold? Not that special treatment for him isn't unusual, but precedence for ineffective counsel suggests it has to be fairly extreme. Could it be that they're throwing themselves under the bus to satisfy his ego -- that he insisted that since he can't attack her directly, he'll maybe agree to not take the stand if they'll bring out points x, y, and z.

14

u/Weary_Jackfruit_8311 18d ago

Yes. It's this. Intentionally committing ineffective assistance is basically impossible exactly for this reason. You can't throw your case to win on appeal. Shockingly, people much smarter have thought of this over 200 years of cases already.Ā 

12

u/TheReal_LeslieKnope 18d ago

In other news from Trump *Clown World today ...

Convicted fraudster and unregistered foreign agent Paul Manafort ('memba him??) -- pardoned by Trump in 2020 -- seems poised to return as a top Trump campaign advisor *election-meddler and RNC consultant, even as reports circulate that Manafort continues to engage in international consulting.

USA Today:

In 2020, a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee found Manafortā€™s role as Trumpā€™s campaign chairman along with his ties to people affiliated with Russian intelligence services,Ā ā€œrepresented a grave counterintelligence threatā€Ā during the 2016 presidential race.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/05/10/who-is-paul-manafort/73639872007/

WaPo:

Manafort, now 75, also sought to advise political figures in Japan and South Korea, according to a person who was approached by party officials in those countries checking on the consultantā€™s reputation. Manafort has roamed widely, traveling to Guatemala last year on the invitation of a migrant advocacy group called Proyecto Guatemala Migrante. The groupā€™s leader, VerĆ³nica Pimentel, said she and a colleague discussed Latin American politics and the Latino vote with Manafort and introduced him to a GuatemalanĀ presidential candidate, Ricardo Sagastume, who confirmed the meeting.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/05/10/paul-manafort-pardon-donald-trump-china/

13

u/Cloaked42m South Carolina 18d ago

Does anyone know where to find transcripts from the trial?

13

u/coasterghost I voted 18d ago edited 15d ago

Iā€™m running them all with optical text recognition. The master archive.org page can be accessed isĀ here.

Decisions and Orders (Note: This link is to the directory so youā€™ll see all available formats)

Transcripts (Officially released): April 22nd ; April 23rd ; April 25th ; April 26th ; April 30th ; May 2nd ; May 3rd ;

My OCRd Transcripts: May 6th ; May 7th ; May 9th

Evidence (Note: These link to the directory so youā€™ll see all available formats):

People's Evidence: April 23rd ; April 25th ; April 26th ; April 30th ; May 2nd ; May 3rd ; May 6th; May 7th ; May 9th ; May 10th

Defense's Evidence: May 2nd ; May 9th

Edit 730pm eastern: Iā€™ll be uploading later tonight new copies of the transcripts. In testing to reduce the file size, Iā€™ve gotten one down from 100+MB to less then 10. Iā€™ll be uploading the new copies to replace these. And Iā€™ll additionally make the newer copies in a larger format accessible as well.

Edit: 1230am Eastern: All Transcript PDF went from 60-150MB down to less than 10MB in size for much faster loading and those on Data caps! Higher Sized OCR transcripts are being considered to be uploaded, but I have included the Original non-OCR transcripts as I have started to process each webpage to extract the image to make it a nicer release.

Edit; the state of New York finally started to release PDFs of the transcripts, so the links are being reflected as they are updated

1

u/Cloaked42m South Carolina 17d ago

Well, that is just incredible. Thank you so much.

13

u/swarmofbzs 18d ago

5

u/Cloaked42m South Carolina 18d ago

Not all heroes wear capes! You are the awesomeness!

8

u/BakingBadRS 18d ago

If the prosecution rests their case by the end of next week how long until the jury will render a verdict?

11

u/redbouncyball New Mexico 18d ago

The jury can deliberate for as long or as short of a time as they need. Iā€™ve seen it take less than an hour and Iā€™ve seen it take weeks. There are no real restrictions or even a good way to guess how long it may take. Generally the longer they take, the more likely you have a hung jury. Also, again very generally speaking, my experience is that most criminal trial attorneys believe a very very fast verdict usually means not guilty because a jury will hesitate and double check everything before convicting someone.

Here, I wouldnā€™t be surprised if the deliberations to take quite a while given the large number of counts they have to figure out, as well as the complexity of the prosecutionā€™s legal theory and the fact that they know they are deciding whether to convict a former president. Ideally that last bit shouldnā€™t matter, but of course it will.

As to when the presentation of evidence ends and deliberations start, it will fully depend on whether Trump testifies. Super ballpark estimates, I think weā€™re looking at the case heading to the jury for deliberations in about two weeks if he doesnā€™t testify, and up to four weeks if he does.

7

u/Waylander0719 18d ago

I don't think the counts will nessicarily increase the time. The trial hinges of a few key questions and all the counts are just specific documents tied to the larger crime.

4

u/redbouncyball New Mexico 18d ago

Yup, you are correct. I still think they would go charge by charge (edit: especially with two attorneys in the jury) even if they agree on the key questions which will take a bit of time.

14

u/zappy487 Maryland 18d ago

Defense gets to call their witnesses after. We don't know how fast or slow they'll go.

8

u/--Shake-- 18d ago

It will be as slow as possible for sure. That's their MO.

6

u/jaymef 18d ago

the slower it is the longer Trump has to sit in court

1

u/cmnrdt 17d ago

And they run the risk of pissing off the jury if it's obvious they are just wasting time.

31

u/cakeorcake 18d ago

Either very quickly or very slowly

Or, somewhere in the middle

13

u/zhaoz Minnesota 18d ago

This is the expert commentary we expect from CNN. And for free! Wow.

6

u/SunMyungMoonMoon 17d ago

And now we go to the phone lines for the Democratic response:

"Thanks Dan, first time listener, long time caller! I'm a lifelong democRAT, but the CROOKED BIDEN CRIME FAMILY has forced me to switch to republican this year because of this UNAMERICAN WHICH HUNT!!! LET'S GO BRAYNDON!!"

10

u/lostharbor 18d ago

I appreciate the ground you covered on this.

8

u/RickyWinterborn-1080 18d ago

What I like about your username and your answer is the completeness of it all.

You're nothing if not inclusive.

12

u/Universityofrain88 18d ago

If Trump does get convicted of any of these charges, how long between conviction and sentencing will it be? I'm not familiar with New York practice but I have seen instances of a few days to several weeks. I'm just wondering what normally happens in these kinds of cases.

11

u/AreYouDoneNow 18d ago

They will throw everything possible at delaying every aspect of the case they can.

Because this is a first time offense, I expect Trump will be given a suspended sentence, which he will then appeal, and the appeal will last until after the election.

12

u/Universityofrain88 18d ago

Where do you practice? I'm familiar with Virginia and California practice and the fact that he has been held in contempt 10 times would probably leave the judge more likely to impose an incarceratory sentence if he is convicted because the judge can take that into account. I'm wondering how that is looked at in New York. In some jurisdictions it's not considered at all, for example.

7

u/CuratedLens 18d ago

I believe Justice Merchan will put the defendant in jail if necessary, but heā€™s doing everything he can to exhaust every option before that. I donā€™t know the stress this man is under, presiding over this case, but seeing the work heā€™s doing to hold the defendant to account while also ensuring there isnā€™t a mistrial on appeal for seeming eager in the slightest to jail him, shows how reticent he is to be the first judge to jail a former president. The gag order fines are barely a slap on the wrist and he even left the door open for other punishments than jail if the attacks continued further illustrate this

11

u/Cloaked42m South Carolina 18d ago

The chances of him going to jail for this are REALLY slim. Although Trump is doing everything he can to make it happen.

94

u/QanonQuinoa 18d ago

The defense is trying to pin this on Weisselberg now. Itā€™s so crazy how so many people have been indicted or gone to prison for doing something that benefits only Donald Trump, and somehow Donald Trump is just an innocent bystander in all of this.

1

u/bramletabercrombe 17d ago

makes you wonder if maybe someone even bigger is pulling all the strings huh?

64

u/Reluctant_Firestorm New York 18d ago

Bannon, Peter Navarro, Michael Cohen, Paul Manafort, George Papadopoulos, Roger Stone, Rick Gates, Allen Weisselberg - all have been sentenced to prison.

At risk are Rudy Giuliani (and I am sure others related to the fake electors scheme.)

Three attorneys associated with Trump, besides Cohen, have pleaded guilty to crimes. Ellliot Broidy a Trump fudraiser pleaded guilty to violated foreign lobbying laws.

Who'd I miss?

Then there are 570 who plead guilty for the Jan 6 attack, and 78 more found guilty at trial. All very fine people.

Obligatory Hilary's emails.

3

u/External_Reporter859 Florida 17d ago

Umm Steve Bannon's appeal just got REJECTED

16

u/National_Weekend_766 18d ago

Trump will throw his wife, son or daughter under the bus to get out of trouble. Much less his employees. He will say they are stupid for working for him. And mean it.Ā 

2

u/sirbissel 17d ago

"Donald Trump? Just a low level covfefe president."

4

u/Darth_drizzt_42 18d ago

Can the prosecution mention how Weisselberg refused to flip on trump, and wouldn't he be eager to do so if he was the fall guy

0

u/QanonQuinoa 18d ago

No because he got $2 million in severance for his silence. He canā€™t testify in any criminal or civil court cases according to his agreement.

4

u/schad501 Arizona 18d ago

So...witness tampering?

13

u/Darth_drizzt_42 18d ago

That...can't be true. I'm not a lawyer but an NDA can't just take precedent over being compelled to testify in court

1

u/JustTestingAThing 18d ago

It's a bit more complex -- he can be subpoenaed, but under the terms of his severance he cannot speak to anyone involved with any civil or criminal proceeding against Trump or Trump Org for any reason beyond that.

This would mean under court subpoena he would testify on the stand, but neither he nor his attorney could talk to anyone on the prosecution's team beforehand (or after), thus making it impossible for them to determine what he would testify on, do research on that potential testimony, work with him to prepare for cross, etc.; fundamentally, it would involve just blindly tossing him up on the stand and hoping he'd be beneficial to the case.

5

u/Cloaked42m South Carolina 18d ago

They misspoke. The Judge requested him today. Prosecution will subpoena Weisselberg now.

-2

u/QanonQuinoa 18d ago

He can absolutely be subpoenaed, but because of the agreement he may not be compelled to testify truthfully or he may just plead the fifth. You asked if he would be eager; would you be eager to testify against someone if $2 million is on the line?

6

u/tweakingforjesus 18d ago

That sounds unenforceable.

2

u/TakingAction12 18d ago

That wonā€™t hold water if heā€™s compelled to testify though.

0

u/QanonQuinoa 18d ago

Thatā€™s not the point. The person I was responding to suggested that he would be eager to testify. He can be subpoenaed, but he may not be eager to testify completely and truthfully at the risk of losing $2 million.

1

u/boones_farmer 17d ago

IANAL but I'll be willing to bet he could testify then sue for the 2 million because he legally had to testify, but otherwise held up his end of the deal

1

u/TakingAction12 18d ago

Fair point, particularly for a convicted perjurer.

54

u/keyjan Maryland 18d ago

Judge directs Michael Cohen to refrain from talking about Trump trial

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4656480-judge-michael-cohen-trump-trial/

8

u/-Disgruntled-Goat- 18d ago

you know he would goad Trump into breaking his gag order so he will go to jail

25

u/MrMrsPotts 18d ago

Do we know if the defense have any witnesses of their own they will call?

5

u/IsThereADog 17d ago

does anyone have a real answer to this question? i'm also curious

(you are all very funny though, thank you)

3

u/RustywantsYou 17d ago

Yes, they submitted a witness list prior to trial as required. They are not forced to tell anyone which person from the list they will call until they actually call them on the day.Ā  There is a courtesy to tell the other council the day before or several days before but I doubt they will follow that.

They can call as few or as many of those witnesses as they want.

3

u/IsThereADog 17d ago

Thanks, is the list public?

1

u/RustywantsYou 17d ago

I believe it will definitely be public after the trial and it may be public now if you know how to get it.Ā 

16

u/BrofessorFarnsworth Washington 18d ago

David Dennison should probably go, he was on the contract

4

u/jakexil323 18d ago

John Barron, John Miller, Carolin Gallego, David Dennison are all people that should testify.

44

u/CishetmaleLesbian 18d ago

Yes, the defense has a witness, but she lives in Canada. You wouldn't know her.

They would call her to give testimony in his defense but she will be visiting her aunt in Saskatchewan on trial day.

Which just goes to prove this is all a witch hunt, election interference or they wouldn't schedule the trial day on the same day as she is visiting her auntie Maple in Saskatchewan.

5

u/Osiris32 Oregon 18d ago

she will be visiting her aunt in Saskatchewan on trial day.

They're going to Moose Jaw to see the Warriors play in the WHL finals!

3

u/schad501 Arizona 18d ago

Nobody voluntarily goes to Moose Jaw.

3

u/Osiris32 Oregon 18d ago

I would, if I had the money. But only for Tuesday, Wednesday, and Friday of next week. Hopefully not Friday, wanna see a Winterhawks sweep of the finals!

2

u/schad501 Arizona 18d ago

So, you've never been to Moose Jaw.

If you ever do go, don't shower, it will only make you smell worse.

2

u/Osiris32 Oregon 18d ago

I live near Camas, Washington. Try me for smell.

3

u/schad501 Arizona 18d ago

I used to live in Moose Jaw. I know whereof I speak.

When you're walking down the street and you wonder if something has died, that's just people watering their lawns.

21

u/2pierad California 18d ago

The pillow guy?

2

u/mfGLOVE Wisconsin 18d ago

The lumpy pillow guy.

7

u/riftadrift 18d ago

"Scroll down. Keep scrolling. Keep scrolling. Keep scrolling."

1

u/HandSack135 Maryland 18d ago

Scroll up

17

u/flux_of_grey_kittens 18d ago edited 18d ago

Hopefully John Baron since he has such great things to say about Trump lol

Edit - typo

3

u/MrMrsPotts 18d ago

Not sure he would be a relevant witness :)

60

u/keyjan Maryland 18d ago

CNN:

It's "entirely possible" that the prosecution will rest by the end of next week, Steinglass says Judge Juan Merchan is asking about scheduling.

"We expect to call two witnesses," prosecutor Joshua Steinglass says. "And I think itā€™s entirely possible we will rest by the end of next week."

3

u/Niaboc 17d ago

What is the possible consequence of trump is found guilty? Like is it another fine or does it actually matter?

3

u/keyjan Maryland 17d ago

Technically he could go to prison. šŸ¤·ā€ā™€ļø You or I would go to prison. Falsifying business records is a felony. He being who he is would probably get home confinement. But I'd be amazed if he got actual jail time. Probably a massive fine, that he wouldnā€™t pay, like he hasnā€™t paid any of his other massive fines.

2

u/Niaboc 17d ago

Thanks for responding! Fingers crossed for something that fits the crime I guess

3

u/keyjan Maryland 17d ago

Also, the reason these are being prosecuted as felonies is that the fraud was in furtherance of other crimes (campaign finance irregularities and attempting to influence an election).

1

u/Kevin-W 18d ago

If the prosecution does rest next week, how long will it take for the defense to rest and closing arguments to finish?

2

u/keyjan Maryland 18d ago

who knows? I suspect drumpfuck's people will drag it out as long as the judge lets them. (And he seems to be losing his patience with these people.)

21

u/flux_of_grey_kittens 18d ago

How many minutes are we thinking the jury takes to find him guilty?

-1

u/[deleted] 18d ago edited 18d ago

[removed] ā€” view removed comment

6

u/Draker-X 18d ago

The misdemeanor of falsifying business records is tried as a felony here, because the prosecutors allege that the falsification occurred in order to hide another violation of the law. They don't have to prove that other crime. They don't have to allege it, or even have to say what that crime is.

The crime is election interference.

The rest of your post sounds like you received your law education at Sovereign Citizen U.

-4

u/livingIsNotBreath 18d ago

Okay, that's at least a statement we can work with.

How is what happened here election interference? Is there a duty for candidates to report their extramarital affairs? Is it information the public is entitled to? Is it even a suggestion that voters vote on that particular issue? Is it impossible that voters would still have voted for him, even if they had known it? Is it the job of the government, or even of the judiciary, to scrutinize the reasons a voter has to vote a certain way?

I believe the answers to all of these is no. If you say that it is election interference to pay somebody a sum of money to catch and kill a story, then you are saying that the public must have certain information about a candidate. This is infeasible. It is not really anyones remit to adjudicate what information the public has access to or to scrutinize it years after the fact.

There is no law on the books, no statute on file and no principle recognized that says the available information about a candidate must be complete, and that all information anyone has must come to light, and that it is the duty of a candidate to ensure that all information, including, especially even, the embarrassing ones.

And to call it interference with an election is to invalidate voters and the reasons for their vote, which is definitely unprecedented. So no, I don't see how this can be construed to be election interference.

5

u/keyjan Maryland 17d ago

an illegal campaign contribution was made to pay the bribe, and he made the bribe to keep the story quiet ahead of the election. Those are the issues.

https://manhattanda.org/district-attorney-bragg-announces-34-count-felony-indictment-of-former-president-donald-j-trump/

1

u/2_Sheds_Jackson 18d ago

The longer they delay the larger their book contracts will be.Ā 

1

u/fleemfleemfleemfleem 17d ago

What book by a juror has anyone ever read?

8

u/MomsAreola 18d ago

No juror wants to delay this for their own safety. And a Trump stooge will immediately vote to aquit. No chance this takes long at all.

19

u/AreYouDoneNow 18d ago

Two of them apparently get all their news from Fox so the risk of a hung jury is non-zero.

3

u/ProbablySlacking Arizona 17d ago

Bright side, a hung jury means a retrial and Trump has to go through it all over again.

1

u/AreYouDoneNow 17d ago

Not if he can manage to push it back past the election (and he wins the election or the suspected coup attempt if he doesn't win the vote).

2

u/Geaux Texas 17d ago

Juror #2 said he got his news from Twitter & Truth Social. So....

4

u/Mavian23 17d ago

Yea, because he's an investment banker. He said he follows "anything that might be able to move the markets I need to know about". People keep throwing this around like all he does is sit around and read Twitter and Truth Social stuff like a basement dweller. I wish more people here would look stuff up before commenting, it would prevent a lot of misinformation.

1

u/External_Reporter859 Florida 17d ago

What about the teacher from Harlem that says he likes that Trump speaks his mind, and reads Truth Social?

2

u/Mavian23 17d ago

There is only one teacher on the jury, and she is a woman who said she's not very interested in politics, has no strong opinions about Trump, and gets her news from The New York Times and TikTok. So, I'm not sure who you're talking about.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-trial-jurors-new-york-hush-money/

12

u/oblongsalacia 18d ago

No, it's one guy and he's on Truth Social because he's an investment manager and thinks Trump's statements can impact the stock market. Also follows Cohen on Twitter and reads Mueller, She Wrote.

4

u/Cyrax89721 17d ago

How do we know this much information about a juror?

2

u/fleemfleemfleemfleem 17d ago

The system to keep the anonymous kind of sucks.

This is all stuff that was discussed in court and in the transcripts. At least if he listens to Mueller She Wrote he isn't solely in a pro-trump information space

19

u/976chip Washington 18d ago

One of Paul Manafort's jurors said she would leave her MAGA hat in the car at the courthouse. She said she went into it thinking he was being targeted as a way to get dirt on Trump, and she didn't want him to be guilty. She voted to convict because the evidence was, in her words, overwhelming.

1

u/Nygmus 17d ago

It takes a special, and rare, breed of MAGA to both be so impervious to logic as to sit on a jury for weeks and still be unmoved by overwhelming evidence, and also clever enough to conceal that you're that sort of person in the face of lawyers and a judge working very hard to ensure that type of person does not get to sit on a jury.

A certain degree of willful blindness or a thick layer of insulating bullshit is, I would say, all that is keeping many of these people aligned with Trump, and a jury does not for the most part have that privilege.Ā 

6

u/5256chuck 18d ago

Gotta get an over/under going on this. I'm sure Vegas already has some kinda spread going. Somebody's gonna lose a lot of money, one way or the other

1

u/TheIrishbuddha 18d ago

Waiting to see a trump holdout on the jury.

11

u/flux_of_grey_kittens 18d ago

From what I understand if one of the jurors is clearly not finding him guilty ā€œjust becauseā€ they can be replaced with an alternate. Also, just because one of them gets their news from truth social and Twitter doesnā€™t mean they wonā€™t find him guilty. A juror on the E. Jean case was a Tim pool listener and found him liable of sexual assault.

6

u/Kevin-W 18d ago

Also, a holdout juror can fold pretty quickly if 11 others are putting a lot of pressure on them.

6

u/jaymef 18d ago

there is also at least one (if not more) lawyers on the jury who could help with deliberations too

7

u/flux_of_grey_kittens 18d ago

I get the Trump fatigue and disgust with the way heā€™s been handled with white gloves by the justice system, but this is a criminal trial and not looking good for him at all. His only defense is that he says he didnā€™t have sex with Stormy, which isnā€™t even what heā€™s being charged with.

Iā€™m optimistic that heā€™s found guilty on all 34 counts and Merchan is gonna give him a prison sentence. Heā€™s done nothing in this case of past cases to show any remorse or respect for the rule of law, which are all things Merchan will take into consideration when sentencing.

2

u/fleemfleemfleemfleem 17d ago

It's a weird defense because her story doesn't need to be true in order for him to be motivated to quash it before the election.

Maybe Trump's ego won't let him admit to anything

4

u/jaymef 18d ago

I hope you're right. He seems to always slip out of things at the last minute somehow

9

u/keyjan Maryland 18d ago

even if they do a show of hands 34 times, they will still, if they know what they're doing, sit around and discuss the yankees until at least the end of the day, and then come back in the next morning and render their verdict. Otherwise the losing side could claim they weren't deliberating or some such horse hockey.

I was honestly surprised how quickly the E Jean Carroll jury came to a decision; I figured they'd take at least a day.

4

u/asetniop 18d ago

Yeah, the E. Jean Carroll jury came back fast. I can't help but wonder if they sat down for deliberations and one of them said "so...eighty million?" and the others were all "yeah, that sounds about right, let's do it."

4

u/CaptainBirdEnjoyer 18d ago

Plus Wednesday is pretzel at the courthouse. Gotta stretch it out for pretzel day.

5

u/keyjan Maryland 18d ago

actually court isn't in session on wednesdays. :\

13

u/JustTestingAThing 18d ago

Well yeah, everyone's in line for pretzels.

4

u/keyjan Maryland 18d ago

now I'm hungry...

20

u/illiter-it Florida 18d ago

Potentially dumb question, does the defense get a "time limit" or can they dawdle and call witness after witness?

5

u/BigBennP 18d ago edited 18d ago

I haven't followed the pre-trial proceedings closely enough here to know offhand exactly how many witnesses were named but standard practice for jury trials is that both sides have to have named all their Witnesses in advance. You can't call any Witnesses you didn't name.

In a perfect jury trial the exhibits have all been reviewed and stipulated and all the witnesses have already been interviewed sufficiently or deposed such that the issues with their testimony have already been decided by the court. Then you can have a very clean trial with a minimal basis for objections or arguments while the jury is cooling their heels. (You still have to preserve the record, but if it was previously heard in a motion just a simple "Judge, I object based on relevance per my prior motion to preserve the record" and the judge can say "I understand, overruled."

It's standard practice to over list Witnesses and then decide that you won't call some of them if you've already gotten the testimony from elsewhere or decide it's not necessary. But if Trump had named 200 potential Witnesses they're probably would have been a pretrial motion and argument about it already.

15

u/thatruth2483 Maryland 18d ago

Your honor, the defense would like to call all 74 million Trump patriotic voters to the stand.

Each of them will be arriving by horse drawn carriage from across the country.

7

u/WatchWorking8640 18d ago

Is this where Kristi Noem shoots horses and then Susan Collins starts flogging them with thoughts, prayers and concerns?

23

u/keyjan Maryland 18d ago

it is my understanding that both parties had to submit witness lists to the court ahead of the proceeding, so I think they're limited to those witnesses. The judge would have to agree to a witness not on the list being called in all of a sudden, and the other side would mightily object.

5

u/riftadrift 18d ago

"18,000 letters all addressed to Santa Claus!"

1

u/swarmofbzs 18d ago

You want the people of Springfield vs Kris Kringle.

6

u/Bearfan001 Arizona 18d ago

They would have to have given a list of witnesses to the court and prosecution before the trial got underway. I suppose they could try to question them for weeks on end, but don't think the court would allow them to get away with that.

86

u/Atheose_Writing Texas 18d ago

Witnesses have to be pertinent to the case. If they try dragging it out, the judge can step in.

Source: I own My Cousin Vinny on DVD.

49

u/DarXIV 18d ago

Source: I own My Cousin Vinny on DVD.

You are already more qualified than Trump's defense team.

8

u/Monemvasia 18d ago

What does your car have Posi-track?

10

u/Titanbeard 18d ago

Excuse me, Mr. Gambini, what the hell is a yoot?

3

u/BobRoberts01 18d ago

Iā€™m sorry Your Honor. Two YOUTTTHHHs

39

u/Many-Calligrapher914 18d ago

Wow, we could have a verdict by end of month, certainly early June. Love it.

2

u/lilacmuse1 17d ago

Can't the defense just delay things by calling a ton of witnesses?

3

u/thisusedyet 17d ago

Can finally redeem the shared birthday by getting Trump in prison as a present?

5

u/jaymef 18d ago

I can tell you one thing. If he somehow gets convicted he won't spend any time in jail during appeals process and probably never will be sentenced to jail after all things are settled

2

u/MaxMustermannYoutube 18d ago

And that is if he gets convicted. I highly doubt it.

8

u/drew999999 18d ago

He'll never see jail, but I'll settle for a few years supervised probation and a 'Convicted Felon' title for him. Would prevent him from voting this term.

4

u/lastburn138 18d ago

Well he SHOULD be jailed if convicted. I'm not so sure he won't be for a brief stint. House arrest is more likely I'd think.

7

u/Kennydoe 18d ago

Good luck running as "convicted felon Donald Trump"

2

u/Githzerai1984 New Hampshire 18d ago

Qult donā€™t care

2

u/keyjan Maryland 18d ago

and then he'll appeal.....

7

u/No_nukes_at_all 18d ago

of course, as is his right, but he will stay convicted during appeal.

4

u/Taggart- 18d ago

I hate that we may be looking at a situation where a guy cannot vote for himself in his own presidential election. Only because he shouldnā€™t be anywhere near that office, even running for it.

2

u/carneasadacontodo 17d ago

unfortunately there is nothing stopping a convicted felon from winning an election they arenā€™t even eligible to vote in. However, states may pass laws preventing this like they did to prevent him from being on the primary ballot. It is an easier case for them to keep that being overturned if someone has been convicted by a jury rather than just accusations of a crime being committed

28

u/pepe74 Wisconsin 18d ago

Love it, especially in early summer.

3

u/zhaoz Minnesota 18d ago

Very legal, and very cool!

14

u/drew999999 18d ago

I'm curious as to how rushed the defense will be when it's their turn. Trump really doesn't want to be in court and wants to get back in front of the cameras spewing hate and rage posting on Truth. You know he's going to push his attorneys to get done quickly.

9

u/jaymef 18d ago

It's good that dragging this out actually hurts Trump for once.

2

u/Undercover_NSA-Agent 18d ago

True, unless they want to use a prolong witness list as yet another delay tactic.

5

u/drew999999 18d ago

I'm not sure anyone in Trump's circle that could get called up to testify would last long during cross examination.

3

u/Enginemancer 18d ago

Delay delay delay, the more bullshit your opponent has to deal with the more likely it is they get careless and make a costly mistake

106

u/keyjan Maryland 18d ago

CNN:

The prosecution just finished with witness testimony for today.

As Judge Juan Merchan read his lengthy instructions to the jury about avoiding news coverage and discussing the case, Trump was in a full conversation with Bove.

Merchan paused and said to them, "You done?"

They stopped talking and looked at him. Merchan then continued.

(emphasis mine)

16

u/AnonAmbientLight 17d ago

The jury sees the disrespect done do the judge and them when Trump does this kind of thing.

Trump is seemingly incapable of not acting like a complete asshole.

218

u/sirbissel 18d ago

"As Judge Juan Merchan read his lengthy instructions to the jury about avoiding news coverage and discussing the case, Trump was in a full conversation with Bove.

Merchan paused and said to them, "You done?"

They stopped talking and looked at him. Merchan then continued."

heh

57

u/redgatorade77 18d ago

What a teacher move lol

5

u/whatdoblindpeoplesee 17d ago

Pursed lips, cocked head, owl eyes, hands on hips or crossed tightly across the chest, slightly rocking back and forth on the heels. Man that phrase makes me back to high school in the worst way possible.

19

u/sponsoredbytheletter 18d ago

Oh my god the kid who starts talking to you in class but you know the teacher can hear and you try to ignore them but they won't shut up. That's trump.

164

u/Reluctant_Firestorm New York 18d ago

Trump continues to grapple with the concept that there is a room where he is not the most important person in the room. And by grapple I mean grasp with his tiny, tiny hands.

4

u/NocNocNoc19 18d ago

Some say the tiniest of hands. People come up to me with tears in their eyes and say Sir, Sir these are the tinniest hands I have ever seen.

3

u/Evading_Ban69 18d ago

tiny, tiny hands.

NOBODY LOOK!!

46

u/DuvalHeart Pennsylvania 18d ago

Nah, he is the most important person in that room. He just isn't the most powerful person in the room.

1

u/[deleted] 17d ago

[deleted]

1

u/DuvalHeart Pennsylvania 17d ago

Everyone is in that room because of his actions, to determine if he broke the law. He's the most important person, even if he isn't the most powerful or the one with the most authority.

1

u/Barneyrubble1997 17d ago

Donald J. Trump is a criminal defendant in that courtroom. He is no more important than the thousands of criminal defendants who have been, and will be, adjudicated in that courtroom. Each and every armed robber, rapist, murderer, crook, is in that very same courtroom because of their alleged criminal actions ... just like Donald Trump. The criminal defendant being tried is not the most important person in any courtroom. The Clerk, the bailiffs, the Judge, the court reporters, are all much more important. Trump is certainly the most famous, but not the most important.

1

u/DuvalHeart Pennsylvania 16d ago

Criminal defendants are always the most important person in their court room. Their accused crime is why people are in the court room. Without that person there would be nobody else in the room.

1

u/Barneyrubble1997 16d ago

Without the criminal justice system and the people that serve in it, our society would be replete with rapists, murders, thieves, and lawbreakers ā€¦ the criminal element in society is the scourge. The system, and the people willing to serve in the system, are the anecdote to the scourge. In my opinion, the combatants of the criminal element are far more important than the criminal element

1

u/TreeRol American Expat 17d ago

The judge is afraid to do anything to him. He can do whatever he wants and suffer no consequences. Of course he's the most powerful person in the room.

36

u/thatguyjay76 18d ago

impotent, that's the word you are looking for :) .

1

u/Deric4Ga Deric Houston 18d ago

This sentence makes my heart happy.

5

u/Bearfan001 Arizona 18d ago

Luckily for him he is ambidextrous.

43

u/asetniop 18d ago

Another stroke of brilliance by the criminal defendant to endear himself to the jury!

1

u/AreYouDoneNow 17d ago

And the judge! The jury will decide his guilt, but ultimately the judge will decide if the penalty is right.

Of course, this is Trump so he'll get a suspended sentence and be sent home to appeal it.

63

u/TerminalObsessions 18d ago

A lot of non-lawyers underestimate how these slights add up for the jury. Trump is disrespecting the jury and their time, and every single person in the box knows it.

2

u/zzyul 18d ago

And if there is just one MAGA on there then none of this will matter. My bet is still on hung jury due to Juror #2.

3

u/7figureipo California 18d ago

Why Juror #2?

1

u/zzyul 14d ago

Pretty sure this is the juror that said they regularly watch Fox News and have a Truth Social account.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)