Trump Trial
- Thread starter GURPS
- Start date
HemiHauler
Well-Known Member
This is the problem with your shitty sources. They’re shitty.
The jury *has to be unanimous* that your oversized oompa-loompa cult hero falsified records and did so with an intent to commit another crime.
The jury *does NOT have to be unanimous* on what the other crime was. Those are the rules under New York State law.
They invented the word "histrionics" just for you, apparently.
CPUSA
Well-Known Member
You're kidding right now, right?
When has this bullchit ever been applied before now?
Never. that's when...but you keep right on thinking this is fair & judicial, you POS fagcist
HemiHauler
Well-Known Member
Prove it hasn’t happened before. I’ll wait.
gemma_rae
Well-Known Member
The burden is on you pig boy.
No you have to prove it has, that is how it works. Shouldn't take you more than a 10 minute search.
HemiHauler
Well-Known Member
LOL, plebes — the both of you!
I’d explain it, but you’re both too stupid to understand.
another classic rhetorical fail.
gemma_rae
Well-Known Member
Nah, you're too stupid to explain why there is air. You won't get the comment, but I refuse to explain it to a retard like you.
CPUSA
Well-Known Member
Prove it has...
Yep didn't think you could, gave you a simple task and you are too simple to find ONE example. You shot your wad. LOLOLOL
gemma_rae
Well-Known Member
Well maybe not just yet, but I'm sure he's flailing himself furiously.
Edit:
SemenSoiler is not allowed to like this post unless he begins paying for his humiliation.
Make your check payable to SoMD in the amount of $100 per insult.
Last edited:
HemiHauler
Well-Known Member
I cite the laws, y’all slack-jawed knuckle-knuckle draggers go, “Nuh-uh. Y’a but Hunter Biden!”
So you can pretend you won!
gemma_rae
Well-Known Member
This wasn't about winning this was about you backing up YOUR position, you threw down the gauntlet when you said prove it never happened before which cannot be proven. Therefore the burden of proof was on you. Then you FAILED miserably, sorry bro this was all on you. LolI cite the laws, y’all slack-jawed knuckle-knuckle draggers go, “Nuh-uh. Y’a but Hunter Biden!”
So you can pretend you won!
A long read (recommend you toggle the reader view) but it seems that NYPL 175.10 has been successfully prosecuted before. What isn't covered is what if the original NYPL 175.05 violation has time lapsed, can it still be employed to up-charged to NYPL 175.10.
www.lawfaremedia.org
And another issue with that process as the defendant was never advised and/or charged with the additional offense. This I see as a fundamental 6th Amendment violation. Not to mention that the judge is allowing for the jury to mix and match what they see as the additional crime without being in unanimous agreement.
What Must Prosecutors Prove in Trump’s NY Trial?
Some in-the-weeds questions on which the New York Trump trial depends.
And another issue with that process as the defendant was never advised and/or charged with the additional offense. This I see as a fundamental 6th Amendment violation. Not to mention that the judge is allowing for the jury to mix and match what they see as the additional crime without being in unanimous agreement.
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
This whole thing is crazy, but lets look it over.
In order to be guilty the Jurors all have to be unanimous that Trump falsified some business records.
Then they have to find that he did so because he was going to commit some other crime.
Now he is charged with 34 crimes and none of the jurors have to agree on which crime he committed. They each can take their pick of the one they allege that he committed. They just have to agree that he did commit one of the 34.
The they have to be anonymous in saying he did this in order to commit another crime .
Juror unanimity is not necessary on what separate crime Trump intended to commit. Only that he did intend to commit one.
They have to agree that he intended to commit a crime that he isn't even charged with. I suppose the jury must be psychic in order to be able to read Trumps mind as to what crime he intended to commit.. What a farce.
I have to be careful what i say here because I don't need the FBI down on my ass. But the American people should not allow this to happen.
In order to be guilty the Jurors all have to be unanimous that Trump falsified some business records.
Then they have to find that he did so because he was going to commit some other crime.
Now he is charged with 34 crimes and none of the jurors have to agree on which crime he committed. They each can take their pick of the one they allege that he committed. They just have to agree that he did commit one of the 34.
The they have to be anonymous in saying he did this in order to commit another crime .
Juror unanimity is not necessary on what separate crime Trump intended to commit. Only that he did intend to commit one.
They have to agree that he intended to commit a crime that he isn't even charged with. I suppose the jury must be psychic in order to be able to read Trumps mind as to what crime he intended to commit.. What a farce.
I have to be careful what i say here because I don't need the FBI down on my ass. But the American people should not allow this to happen.
