Reply to Trump found Guilty on all charges!

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Trump found Guilty on all charges! "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Pg 150. Has anyone named the "federal crime" that was broken? [/quote]

You will get responses like "read the verdict" or "we have told you but you didn't want to hear it" but the truth is.......
Nobody knows the "underlying crime" because it was not indicated in the verdict and the jury didn't have to specify on the jury sheet. 
So, no, we don't know.  Blatantly unConstitutional.  [/quote]

Actually if you read the case which you have not it was spelled out 1000% documented he broke NY criminal code 34 times felonies.

This is not hard for a reader above 2nd grade.

Trump was charged with 34 counts of falsification of business records in the first degree, which is a felony in New York.

And yes it was spelled out. Yes it was communicated to a jury. Yes he is a citizen of the US just like you subject to criminal codes in the states he breaks them which in this case was NY.

You are a moron.

[/quote]

Have you even followed the case for 5 minutes? The business records charge isn't a felony unless it was in furtherance of another crime, which has never been specified. 
[/quote]
[twitter]https://x.com/gwheeler1/status/1796658509506842984?s=61&t=I7ZozTDGmPOsC7cmSRxwgA[/twitter][/quote]

Mr. Wheeler is a Florida labor and employment attorney who states as a conclusion only that unamimity relating to the predicate act is not required.  No citation, no nothing.  [b]This flies in the face of courts everywhere.[/b]  Though if you'd choose to believe the opinion of a non-NY qualified, non-criminal defense attorney, please do so.[/quote]
Source for this?[/quote]

"In the RICO context, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit explained:

[T]he jury [in a RICO case] must be unanimous not only that at least two [predicate] acts were proved, but must be unanimous as to each of two predicate acts.

United States v. Gotti, 451 F.3d 133, 137 (2d Cir. 2006) (emphasis added); see also Haynes v. United States, 936 F.3d 683 (7th Cir. 2019) (same) (quoting Gotti, supra); United States v. Carr, 424 F.3d 213, 224 (2d Cir. 2005) (“[T]he jury must find that the prosecution proved each one of those two … specifically alleged predicate acts beyond a reasonable doubt.”).""

Read the rest here - https://www.justsecurity.org/96654/trump-unanimous-verdict/  It is a reasonably objective analysis.  [/quote]
How is that precedential to a New York State court case?[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics