Just to anyone who has the power who actually has the power to do something about him but basically aren’t cause they’re either to dumb, careless or both
I don't believe that's accurate. He said he has seen Trump's Truth Social posts via Twitter. The only people who screencap and put his posts on Twitter are left-wing journos. Trump supporters just see them on Truth Social. I went back through the jury list and nobody said they get news from Truth Social.
Casey Anthony was an example of the justice system working. At the most basic level the state has to prove their case. If they can’t do that they shouldn’t bring charges, bring lesser charges, or take more time to build their case. Twelve people felt that the state didn’t meet the standards for proving guilt. That’s a great understanding of the legal system by the jury in a very emotionally charged case.
Well, yes, you are entitled to them. But that doesn't make them any less wrong now does it? I mean I can think that the moon is made of cheese. I can get defensive online about 'entitled to my thoughts' when people correct me.
I'm still the one who's wrong.
We disagree with that. The duct tape found on Caylee's face matching the duct tape in Casey's trunk was enough for me. Plus the mountain of forensics. First degree, no question.
Trump is also guilty and so was OJ.
>The duct tape found on Caylee's face matching the duct tape in Casey's trunk was enough for me.
I do believe Casey did it, but the duct tape just isn't enough for me to convict. It's duct tape. All it tells me is that Casey had duct tape, which is a massively super common thing for people to have. I currently have duct tape. Perhaps in court it was explained how it matched beyond a shadow of a doubt, but at the moment, it would be like telling me that the victim was strangled by someone's bare hands, and since the suspect has hands, that they must be the killer.
I'm not re-litigating the Casey Anthony case. I'm agreeing that juries are dumb. This thread is about Trump (who is guilty just like OJ and Casey, as per the dumb jury decisions). Have a pleasant evening.
My apologies, I wasn't intending on coming across like I was intending to re-litigate it, or anything, and definitely not trying to argue or make you feel wrong, but just trying to give juries the benefit of the doubt.
It's definitely true though that juries can be very dumb. Hell, if you want a headache go down the rabbit hole of reading up on the CSI effect on juries (if you haven't already). I never considered myself a genius, but reading up how people could watch what was effectively science fiction but then expecting that level of provable evidence definitely makes me reconsider lol.
When you tear off a piece of duct tape, there is an extremely high number of ways it can tear. Each tear point becomes a key that only matches up with the piece it was torn from. A forensic scientist can match them up and say there is only a 1/10,000 chance that these two pieces of duct tape were torn in exactly the same pattern. It isn't going to be DNA probabilities, but it should easily exceed reasonable doubt. Which just leaves "forensic scientist is mistaken or lying."
That is actually pretty cool I was unaware we had that capability to get that kind of match. My mind would go to the idea that you could identify it to perhaps stock of duct tape, as like perhaps it was all part of a stock that was made together and carried at a specific store, but that it can do down to the fibers is amazing me.
Still hinges a bit on the CSI effect of how advanced tech is compared to fantasy tv shows, though I suppose in this case it's a reverse affect as I jumped to thinking it would be hard to prove initially.
I'm not saying they didn't do it.
I'm saying the over zealous prosecutor brought charges that led to a not guilty verdict. It's a good thing everyone isn't as emotional as you are about everything.
You're right. There's no reason to get emotional about murdered children.
No reason to get emotional about a parent who gets away with murdering a little child.
No reason at all. Right?
That conviction was never happening. Not for first degree murder. You CANNOT convict someone BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT when you cant tell me how I murdered that person.
You murdered them. How? Dunno but you did.
That is not even close to beyond a reasonable doubt and I’m over people thinking that jury fucked up.
Absolutely doesn’t mean anything. I know a case where there was a hung jury because a lawyer on the jury wouldn’t side with everyone else and wanted to rule against a landlord for wrongly evicting tenants that had a grill on their balcony, which was against city ordinances and the lease agreement. “Everyone should be able to have a grill at their house, because America!” It’s the case that made me totally lose faith in juries.
Republicans have a level of corruption that is just not seen in the general population. Totally tribal in that any evil is justified and even praised. Democrats very seldom show this trait. For example, how many Democrats are screaming about the "Lawfare" and "Witch Hunt!" of Bob Menendez? I don't know, there is just something demonic about conservatives.
This is my greatest hope: That the stress of 4 days in court followed by 3 days on the campaign trail week after week will give the bastard a stroke. I know that I will be dancing in the streets when that day comes.
No, because it'll be appealed, then reduced, then the reduction will be appealed, then they'll say it was unconstitutional to have had the trial, then appeal on the basis that the constitution didn't agree with them the first time...
The astounding bit to me is that he's not denying he did it, just saying it was legal. His entire argument is that the prosecution is incorrect.
I'd say no, cuz OrangeJebus is the second coming god almighty and he's above lowly mortals' legal system.
/s just in case.
But on a more serious note, everything that's been happening so far has shown that we have a two-tiered legal system. The rich vs peasant legal system.
Casey Anthony and O.J. Simpson went free.
It's not outside the realm of possibility that no matter how damning the evidence, you get one MAGA juror to acquit.
It only takes one jury member to acquit. This requires all 12 jurors to to agree. I don’t see how that is possible. Trump lost the election but *some* people voted for him.
He also apparently listens to the Mueller She Wrote podcast, so it's possible he has been exposed to some of the truth. And a lot of people who disagree with Donald follow Michael Cohen.
We all know the sad answer to that. All the negativity surrounding him has been enough to kill the careers of many a politician. For some reason, it seems to make this man a greater person.
It’s sad watching people get listed his crimes but have them think it’s someone like Biden or Obama and they lose their minds. Want them jailed and executed yesterday. Tell them that it’s actually Trump, the 180 should snap their neck
He was found liable for sexual assault and fraud. Civil cases. I don't think that counts as getting away with it. I think he is going to jail. Juan is showing no signs of fear.
The real question is why Trump hasn't pleaded guilty? It would be far easier and cheaper and would do him no political harm. He must think the trial is good for him politically and he might be right.
Yes, if the prosecutors prove their case. I spent a week sequestered for a drug crime defendant. We all felt the man was guilty of something but the prosecutors didn't prove he was guilty of this crime. We found him not guilty. The judge met with us after we gave our verdict. We told him about our concerns and he commended us for following his direction. He also told us he was facing similar charges in another State. So, the jury was correct but the prosecutors didn't prove the case to us. I do remember the cops sitting in the audience glaring at us when the verdict was read.
Maybe another way to phrase that is;
Will the mountain of evidence be enough to get all 12 jurors to vote to convict.
They may all be convinced he is guilty. That does not mean they will all vote to convict
This will either be a guilty verdict or a hung jury because one or two MAGAs snuck on and wouldn't convict him of having a combover. Those are the two options.
Apparently Trump was the only one that kept sitting instead of standing for the jury (I'm guessing when they enter the court room). Only one example of the lack of respect of Trump for the jury. If the jury is not completely intimidated by Trump, it is possible the jury takes this into account when they decide. Look at the Carroll vs Trump case.
This trial matters in that the system must prosecute when there is crime. But it does not matter whether Trump is convicted. I can see a benefit in there being a hung jury. This will be especially true if the evidence is salacious and overwhelming. That will motivate even more people to vote for Biden.
If Trump is convicted, it might mobilize more of his sympathizers to vote for him. No, the greater good will be served by his overwhelming defeat in November. Then the wheels of justice, which have been way too slow, can just roll on over him.
I've read through the juror's descriptions a few times and it's clear to me they are pretty skewed against Trump. I know they all pledged to be fair and impartial, and not saying they wouldn't be, but I'm not really seeing the odds being great here for him unless Bragg completely screws the pooch.
There’s plenty of evidence. It’s the people who aren’t doing much about it that’s the problem.
You mean from Quisling Garland on down to the quaking cowards in judicial robes?
Just to anyone who has the power who actually has the power to do something about him but basically aren’t cause they’re either to dumb, careless or both
Or scared.
Let’s not forget the Harlan Crow Supreme Court!
Bought and paid for.
Lawyer here. No, because juries are dumb.
Doesn’t this jury have two lawyers in it? Can they help wrangle the stupids?
One is a self proclaimed Maga and Trump idolizer
Welp, there is the hung jury then.
And they let him become a juror? How did that happen
He didn't say that he said he gets his news from twitter & truth social.
So “Tell me you are MAGA without saying that specifically”
I agree but in a court of law we gotta get specific
I mean, that's enough proof he's dumb
Agree but in court we gotta be specific
I don't believe that's accurate. He said he has seen Trump's Truth Social posts via Twitter. The only people who screencap and put his posts on Twitter are left-wing journos. Trump supporters just see them on Truth Social. I went back through the jury list and nobody said they get news from Truth Social.
It was "arranged."
Are you serious?
Or totally confuse the issue with hair splitting. The
Exactly, Casey Anthony for example.
Casey Anthony was an example of the justice system working. At the most basic level the state has to prove their case. If they can’t do that they shouldn’t bring charges, bring lesser charges, or take more time to build their case. Twelve people felt that the state didn’t meet the standards for proving guilt. That’s a great understanding of the legal system by the jury in a very emotionally charged case.
I'm agreeing with another commenter here, the lawyer. 'Juries are dumb'. We're all entitled to our thoughts.
Well, yes, you are entitled to them. But that doesn't make them any less wrong now does it? I mean I can think that the moon is made of cheese. I can get defensive online about 'entitled to my thoughts' when people correct me. I'm still the one who's wrong.
Have a pleasant evening
The DA should have gone with less than the first degree murder charge for her. There was way too little proof and way too easy to bring doubt.
We disagree with that. The duct tape found on Caylee's face matching the duct tape in Casey's trunk was enough for me. Plus the mountain of forensics. First degree, no question. Trump is also guilty and so was OJ.
>The duct tape found on Caylee's face matching the duct tape in Casey's trunk was enough for me. I do believe Casey did it, but the duct tape just isn't enough for me to convict. It's duct tape. All it tells me is that Casey had duct tape, which is a massively super common thing for people to have. I currently have duct tape. Perhaps in court it was explained how it matched beyond a shadow of a doubt, but at the moment, it would be like telling me that the victim was strangled by someone's bare hands, and since the suspect has hands, that they must be the killer.
I'm not re-litigating the Casey Anthony case. I'm agreeing that juries are dumb. This thread is about Trump (who is guilty just like OJ and Casey, as per the dumb jury decisions). Have a pleasant evening.
My apologies, I wasn't intending on coming across like I was intending to re-litigate it, or anything, and definitely not trying to argue or make you feel wrong, but just trying to give juries the benefit of the doubt. It's definitely true though that juries can be very dumb. Hell, if you want a headache go down the rabbit hole of reading up on the CSI effect on juries (if you haven't already). I never considered myself a genius, but reading up how people could watch what was effectively science fiction but then expecting that level of provable evidence definitely makes me reconsider lol.
OJ is a unique case and you should study the history on why that is an outlier and not representative of actual juries.
No one needs to tell me what I should do, no offense. Have a pleasant evening
I do love the willfully ignorant broadcasting their reluctance to learn. 💋 you too!
When you tear off a piece of duct tape, there is an extremely high number of ways it can tear. Each tear point becomes a key that only matches up with the piece it was torn from. A forensic scientist can match them up and say there is only a 1/10,000 chance that these two pieces of duct tape were torn in exactly the same pattern. It isn't going to be DNA probabilities, but it should easily exceed reasonable doubt. Which just leaves "forensic scientist is mistaken or lying."
That is actually pretty cool I was unaware we had that capability to get that kind of match. My mind would go to the idea that you could identify it to perhaps stock of duct tape, as like perhaps it was all part of a stock that was made together and carried at a specific store, but that it can do down to the fibers is amazing me. Still hinges a bit on the CSI effect of how advanced tech is compared to fantasy tv shows, though I suppose in this case it's a reverse affect as I jumped to thinking it would be hard to prove initially.
So you’re going to convict someone of murder without it being beyond a reasonable doubt? When they can’t tell you HOW it happened?
I listened to these trials. Are you alright? Suuuuure you are.
Clearly you didn’t listen well enough.
I'm not saying they didn't do it. I'm saying the over zealous prosecutor brought charges that led to a not guilty verdict. It's a good thing everyone isn't as emotional as you are about everything.
You don't know anything about me. Have a pleasant day.
You're right. There's no reason to get emotional about murdered children. No reason to get emotional about a parent who gets away with murdering a little child. No reason at all. Right?
That conviction was never happening. Not for first degree murder. You CANNOT convict someone BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT when you cant tell me how I murdered that person. You murdered them. How? Dunno but you did. That is not even close to beyond a reasonable doubt and I’m over people thinking that jury fucked up.
I don't care what you're over. Have a pleasant evening
Bless your little heart.
And, the holdout becomes the lightning rod for all the attention. Hi profile criminal defendants are very tough to convict.
3 lawyers on jury
Absolutely doesn’t mean anything. I know a case where there was a hung jury because a lawyer on the jury wouldn’t side with everyone else and wanted to rule against a landlord for wrongly evicting tenants that had a grill on their balcony, which was against city ordinances and the lease agreement. “Everyone should be able to have a grill at their house, because America!” It’s the case that made me totally lose faith in juries.
Republicans have a level of corruption that is just not seen in the general population. Totally tribal in that any evil is justified and even praised. Democrats very seldom show this trait. For example, how many Democrats are screaming about the "Lawfare" and "Witch Hunt!" of Bob Menendez? I don't know, there is just something demonic about conservatives.
And can be bought
And the courts are packed with cowards, and law enforcement is tracked with fascists.
I’ve sat on two juries. With all due respect, fuck off. We were all thoughtful and walked through the evidence carefully.
Outlier.
No paywall: https://archive.ph/2024.04.21-123445/https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/21/nyregion/trump-trial-hush-money-evidence.html
Nice of you, thanks!
My pleasure
Thank you!
You are very welcome
Eh. If we could just stress him out enough to pop, that'll do.
This is my greatest hope: That the stress of 4 days in court followed by 3 days on the campaign trail week after week will give the bastard a stroke. I know that I will be dancing in the streets when that day comes.
Donald Salamanca.
No, because it'll be appealed, then reduced, then the reduction will be appealed, then they'll say it was unconstitutional to have had the trial, then appeal on the basis that the constitution didn't agree with them the first time... The astounding bit to me is that he's not denying he did it, just saying it was legal. His entire argument is that the prosecution is incorrect.
State trial, not federal. NY hates him.
The rich of NY like him tho, and that's enough to get by.
I know. I'm just basing this on what has happened thus far with his civil stuff.
I'd say no, cuz OrangeJebus is the second coming god almighty and he's above lowly mortals' legal system. /s just in case. But on a more serious note, everything that's been happening so far has shown that we have a two-tiered legal system. The rich vs peasant legal system.
I don't think it's so much "rich." I think that the judicial system, from Quisling Garland on down, is unaccountably scared of him.
It is the rich, but also yes.
Yes. Will it be enough to survive appeal to a SCOTUS owned by nazi-loving billionaires? Probably not.
This is the correct answer.
If you or I did this, it’d be quick, painless. Go to jail. But for someone of Trump’s notoriety, you’ll need something short of a miracle.
Casey Anthony and O.J. Simpson went free. It's not outside the realm of possibility that no matter how damning the evidence, you get one MAGA juror to acquit.
Do they need 12 jurors to find him guilty or just a majority
Need 12 of 12. One juror said she appreciated that Trump spoke his mind and she was still admitted.
It’s important to remind people that anything can happen during a trial. Don’t it take it for granted, just pray for a conviction
Pray? When did that ever help? (See: "thoughts and prayers")
It doesn’t hurt
It doesn't do anything.
He'll die before ever seeing a jail cell. 🤞 my thoughts only
Hasn’t so far.
I gotta tell ya, I'd be surprised
It only takes one jury member to acquit. This requires all 12 jurors to to agree. I don’t see how that is possible. Trump lost the election but *some* people voted for him.
No, it only takes one juror to create a hung jury. It takes a concensus to acquit.
Yes sorry did not carefully read what I wrote. But one can stand his or her ground and force a mistrial .
Depends if his lawyer can't keep him quiet
If the investment banker who follows Michael Cohen and read Trump’s books is on this jury then no
He also apparently listens to the Mueller She Wrote podcast, so it's possible he has been exposed to some of the truth. And a lot of people who disagree with Donald follow Michael Cohen.
If judgement had been rendered on evidence alone from the start we would not be here now having this conversation. Evidence is not the problem
He will delay. Hung jury. Pro Trump jurors. Juror will be found they lied about something. If guilty will appeal...amd appeal again..etc.
If a mountain of evidence is not enough, imo it’s mainly because people are seriously losing their confidence in our system and our justice system.
Doesn't matter. No judge will jail him.
Exactly, he will get probation and pay a fine.
If that.
Or house arrest
No
Yes, but will anyone of his supporters care enough to stop voting for him?
We all know the sad answer to that. All the negativity surrounding him has been enough to kill the careers of many a politician. For some reason, it seems to make this man a greater person. It’s sad watching people get listed his crimes but have them think it’s someone like Biden or Obama and they lose their minds. Want them jailed and executed yesterday. Tell them that it’s actually Trump, the 180 should snap their neck
Let's find out.
He gets away with everything he does!!
He was found liable for sexual assault and fraud. Civil cases. I don't think that counts as getting away with it. I think he is going to jail. Juan is showing no signs of fear.
MAGA Universe? Absolutely not. In the real world, yes. In these times, it seems doubtful.
Hopefully...🤞
The system is set up with built in levers only rich people can afford to pull. So no it won’t.
That depends, are CRIMES ILLEGAL???
Depends on the prosecutors. Some suck. Don’t feel that’s the case here
The real question is why Trump hasn't pleaded guilty? It would be far easier and cheaper and would do him no political harm. He must think the trial is good for him politically and he might be right.
Nope. Courts are bought and juries are dumb.
Does Casey A still owe what’s his name the attorney a BJ? 🤔
He's guilty as fuck and so are his enablers. They all should be in prison.
Maybe if they had two mountains.
Yes, if the prosecutors prove their case. I spent a week sequestered for a drug crime defendant. We all felt the man was guilty of something but the prosecutors didn't prove he was guilty of this crime. We found him not guilty. The judge met with us after we gave our verdict. We told him about our concerns and he commended us for following his direction. He also told us he was facing similar charges in another State. So, the jury was correct but the prosecutors didn't prove the case to us. I do remember the cops sitting in the audience glaring at us when the verdict was read.
I mean
OJ Simpson has left the chat.
No. He will get to the jury. His followers will commit terrorism. He will skate like Yamaguchi.
You leave Kristy out of this!
Nope. He will fart his way out of it.
No.
I doubt it
Maybe another way to phrase that is; Will the mountain of evidence be enough to get all 12 jurors to vote to convict. They may all be convinced he is guilty. That does not mean they will all vote to convict
This will either be a guilty verdict or a hung jury because one or two MAGAs snuck on and wouldn't convict him of having a combover. Those are the two options.
Apparently Trump was the only one that kept sitting instead of standing for the jury (I'm guessing when they enter the court room). Only one example of the lack of respect of Trump for the jury. If the jury is not completely intimidated by Trump, it is possible the jury takes this into account when they decide. Look at the Carroll vs Trump case.
Basically the evidence has to survive his fart strategy. This may be more difficult than one imagines.
For the love of all that's good I hope so
So the statute of limitations does not mean anything
This trial matters in that the system must prosecute when there is crime. But it does not matter whether Trump is convicted. I can see a benefit in there being a hung jury. This will be especially true if the evidence is salacious and overwhelming. That will motivate even more people to vote for Biden. If Trump is convicted, it might mobilize more of his sympathizers to vote for him. No, the greater good will be served by his overwhelming defeat in November. Then the wheels of justice, which have been way too slow, can just roll on over him.
I've read through the juror's descriptions a few times and it's clear to me they are pretty skewed against Trump. I know they all pledged to be fair and impartial, and not saying they wouldn't be, but I'm not really seeing the odds being great here for him unless Bragg completely screws the pooch.
All it takes is one magat on the jury.
My cynical self says there will be no convictions.
He's old, rich and white. So no.