Wonder how long prosecution will take for their open... just the day?

But while eating, drinking, smoking and listening to tunes we’ll be scouring the news.

but in the cases I've been involved with, the strategy has been to keep the opening statement from running too long, which risks losing the jury's attention or overwhelming them with information. Usually, the prosecution wants to explain what the charges are and what the prosecution intends to show through live witnesses and documentary exhibits, but without going into a lot of detail.

Not being a lawyer and not sleeping in a Holiday Inn last night...

Can the defense essentially focus on the weakest part of the case, the campaign finance part of it?

Or is the defense not allowed to talk about "the law"

Can they refer to comments by Vance about why he didn't charge years ago?

I think the fake document aspect is easy to charge but if I'm not mistaken they have to tie it to campaign finance law. Did Trump use campaign funds to pay the 130K?

I read a good summary from a Syracuse Law professor and he suggested the final step linking the fraudulent docs to campaign finance is going to be tough.

https://news.syr.edu/blog/2024/04/16/pitch-legal-analysis-of-hush-money-trial-facing-former-president-donald-trump/

I believe the District Attorney must show (1) that the payments were disguised as attorney fees to commit a fraud on someone, (2) that the underlying payments constituted an independent crime, (3) that Trump knew that the underlying payments constituted a crime, and (4) that the reason he covered up the payments was to disguise that crime. Those are going to be hard things to prove.

discussing the way they’ll go about it!

I hope the tapes are admissible.

Not necessarily the primo source for your criminal law analysis.

In addition, he is clearly a biased observer, as he concludes, without argument or proof, that this is a purely political prosecution.

And no, I won't bother with any "content creator" on the payroll of Fox News, MSNBC, CNN or the like...

In other words, I don't care what Turley, Dersh, Weissmann or Tribe say...

Cuz that's what your expert says.

Explain to me, if you'd be so kind, why you believe this guy who, one more time, has never practiced criminal law, is the Word of the Lord, whilst all those other goobers know not whereof they speak.

As for you demand that I produce a better explanation, that's just arrantly silly.

I'm simply asking why you think I should take this dude's word for it, since he's way outside his area of expertise.

As far as I know, you claim no expertise that gives you a basis to evaluate this person's opinion. You just seem to like it a lot.

Last edited Mon Apr 22, 2024, 05:29 PM - Edit history (2)

I'm not an attorney.

I'm an Engineer, earning my degree right out of High School. Sat on the degree for more than a decade while searching for something to do in life that drove my passions. Ended up finding a crazy niche in the late 90's with a large SoCal BioPharma and aquiring 2 more Degrees. But not a Law Degree.

So my natural inclination is to learn more about things I don't understand.

I also have a natural aversion to propaganda, to misinformation that is disrespectful to the reader, assuming I'm stupid.

Turley, Dersh, Tribe and Weissmann are all selling a product. I don't trust them.

So I read... and try to learn.

And it seems like tying the case together will be a challenge at the end. That's all I'm saying.

You say that you are just interested in the facts, ma'am, and that you eschew and abhor "propaganda, to misinformation that is disrespectful to the reader."

I'm not going to go through this piece line by line, but it is filled with conclusory statements, biased statements, and exhibits--as one would expect from this source--an apparent lack of awareness of trial procedure.

I'm sure you noticed that this piece is denominated "Pitch," and is styled as a press release. In other words, it's an op-ed, which kind of right away takes it out of the realm of stately and measured scholarly discourse.

But, just to emphasize my point about the author's obvious bias, here's his walkoff:

I can ignore the conclusion, just taking what I learned about the charges and the law.

But thanks for taking the time, I appreciate it.

How does that even work?

"Well, sure. What he says at the end is silly. But the analysis (although I'm not a lawyer and don't know the statutes or the case law) is totally sound!"

I think you're missing something here.

His basic out line was
1. Tell them what you are going to tell them.
2. Tell them what you need to say.
3. Say briefly what you told them.

It seems like openings for attorney's is step one.

So at least there is no driving involved

Enjoy!

It amuses me to no end

Then scrambled eggs, cheese and onion tacos… Plus, he makes homemade hot sauce and is bringing several kinds… Yeah, tequila shots come after breakfast tacos

Don't have any long engagements over the next six weeks. I plan to keep watch on this.

I’m looking forward to watching him burn.

A new Bingo card for this.

hope his world falls apart tomorrow and he strokes out.

Jumping Jesus he has so many crimes… Stroking out would indeed be best for everyone.

and According to the Book of Exodus, God commanded Moses to tell the Israelites to mark a lamb's blood above their doors so that the Angel of Death would pass over them: they would not be touched by the tenth Plague of Egypt, the death of the firstborn. After this Plague, Pharaoh ordered the Israelites to leave, taking whatever they wanted, and asked Moses to bless him in the name of God. The passage goes on to state that the Passover sacrifice recalls the time when God "passed over the houses of the Israelites in Egypt".

Anything ELSE???

According to the Book of Exodus, God commanded Moses to tell the Israelites to mark a lamb's blood above their doors so that the Angel of Death would pass over them: they would not be touched by the tenth Plague of Egypt, the death of the firstborn. After this Plague, Pharaoh ordered the Israelites to leave, taking whatever they wanted, and asked Moses to bless him in the name of God. The passage goes on to state that the Passover sacrifice recalls the time when God "passed over the houses of the Israelites in Egypt".

Anything ELSE???

I don’t have to wait for it to start, I get to wake up and start looking at updates. Yay!

I feel weird that for bloody years now I’ve checked my phone each morning hoping for his demise. If this goes right it might be even better.

Don't feel weird. I suspect there are a lot more people than the 2 of us who are hoping for his demise.

Who goes first on the opening statement
And at the end, who goes first on the closing statement

My gut says prosecution goes first both times but… I don’t actually know

Good info and much appreciated!

The website I got that from has a complete rundown on how courts operate, including the steps in a trial. I plan on consulting it frequently in the coming days snd weeks.

Here's the main page with the list of links:
https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/resources/law_related_education_network/how_courts_work/

I guess I'm celebrating early. Like I do every night.

Enjoy!

Having listened to him whine about having to be in that cold, cold courtroom , I kicked off my festivities by staring at my gloriously empty calendar, all the while immersed in glee at the thought that he has to get up early to face the music.

I don’t have a single obligation and he has to be somewhere. See what happens when you behave like a decent human being? You can stay in your cozy bed and cuddle with your cat and listen to updates on everyone listening to a litany of his crimes against every single voter in the USA.

Then I’ll be on the phone chortling with the RG and also my brother. We will be comparing menus, besides enjoying our freedom to do what we want. No “sir, sit down” from the judge for us!!

Your plans sound absolutely wonderful!

Happy eating, drinking and smoking!

Will CNN be doing live updates?

Haha, trump.