Jonathan Turley Says Judge Merchan “Crossed the Line” by Suggesting a Witness Be Called by Alvin Bragg’s Team

excalibur

Diamond Member
Mar 19, 2015
19,425
37,221
2,290
He's just doing whatever he wants while ignoring the actual rule of law. Does he think he's back in his native Colombia?

This embarrassment has grown even worse and redounds on the entire judicial branch in New York State, not just Manhattan.



George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said Friday that the judge in former President Donald Trump’s trial crossed “the line” with a suggestion to prosecutors.

New York Judge Juan Merchan suggested that Former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg testify after prosecutors from the office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg sought to introduce Weisselberg’s severance package into evidence, according to Politico. Turley called the suggestion “very unusual” when asked about the development by Fox News host Martha MacCallum.

“It reminds me of a judge when I started out as a lawyer who was notorious because he would say, ‘Is the defense ready to present its case,’ and turn to the prosecutors and say ‘Are we ready to present our case?’ This is a little bit crossing the line. You’re not supposed to be making this a mutual effort,” Turley said.

WATCH:



...



 
He's just doing whatever he wants while ignoring the actual rule of law. Does he think he's back in his native Colombia?

This embarrassment has grown even worse and redounds on the entire judicial branch in New York State, not just Manhattan.


George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said Friday that the judge in former President Donald Trump’s trial crossed “the line” with a suggestion to prosecutors.
New York Judge Juan Merchan suggested that Former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg testify after prosecutors from the office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg sought to introduce Weisselberg’s severance package into evidence, according to Politico. Turley called the suggestion “very unusual” when asked about the development by Fox News host Martha MacCallum.
“It reminds me of a judge when I started out as a lawyer who was notorious because he would say, ‘Is the defense ready to present its case,’ and turn to the prosecutors and say ‘Are we ready to present our case?’ This is a little bit crossing the line. You’re not supposed to be making this a mutual effort,” Turley said.
WATCH:

...



We've been here before.

Nothing Turley says has any meaning, He's totally owned by Faux Niwz.
 
He's just doing whatever he wants while ignoring the actual rule of law. Does he think he's back in his native Colombia?

This embarrassment has grown even worse and redounds on the entire judicial branch in New York State, not just Manhattan.


George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said Friday that the judge in former President Donald Trump’s trial crossed “the line” with a suggestion to prosecutors.
New York Judge Juan Merchan suggested that Former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg testify after prosecutors from the office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg sought to introduce Weisselberg’s severance package into evidence, according to Politico. Turley called the suggestion “very unusual” when asked about the development by Fox News host Martha MacCallum.
“It reminds me of a judge when I started out as a lawyer who was notorious because he would say, ‘Is the defense ready to present its case,’ and turn to the prosecutors and say ‘Are we ready to present our case?’ This is a little bit crossing the line. You’re not supposed to be making this a mutual effort,” Turley said.
WATCH:

...



It's quite a coincidence that the two most rabid Trump hating judges in America just happened to preside over his last two lawsuits. LOL America sees through this sham like a pane of glass.
 
It's quite a coincidence that the two most rabid Trump hating judges in America just happened to preside over his last two lawsuits. LOL America sees through this sham like a pane of glass.

Worse, this guy Merchan did two previous trials involving Trump people and is doing the upcoming Bannon trial.

That's some crazy random selection, eh.
 
We've been here before.

Nothing Turley says has any meaning, He's totally owned by Faux Niwz.

He knows a lot more than you.

And he's 100x smarter (meaning he generally has a garage full of brain capability compared to your half-empty tic-tac box).
More brains, more knowledge.

And he's not from Wichita

Not a tough choice.
 
So are you saying you think it’s ok for a judge to tell prosecutors what witnesses to call?

Of course it is NOT O.K. for a judge to suggest what witnesses to call.

A judge is to manage the process of the trial. Period.
 
Most likely but he's not allowed to use his brain anymore.

That would make the two of you even....if it were the case.

But it's not.

He's quite correct in his assessment of things.

You, OTOH have never been right about anything.
 
He's just doing whatever he wants while ignoring the actual rule of law. Does he think he's back in his native Colombia?

This embarrassment has grown even worse and redounds on the entire judicial branch in New York State, not just Manhattan.


George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said Friday that the judge in former President Donald Trump’s trial crossed “the line” with a suggestion to prosecutors.
New York Judge Juan Merchan suggested that Former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg testify after prosecutors from the office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg sought to introduce Weisselberg’s severance package into evidence, according to Politico. Turley called the suggestion “very unusual” when asked about the development by Fox News host Martha MacCallum.
“It reminds me of a judge when I started out as a lawyer who was notorious because he would say, ‘Is the defense ready to present its case,’ and turn to the prosecutors and say ‘Are we ready to present our case?’ This is a little bit crossing the line. You’re not supposed to be making this a mutual effort,” Turley said.
WATCH:

...



What about lawyers who say the opposite?

Those that think there was nothing wrong with it. Should I believe them or Turley? I can't believe both.

How do we reconcile their views in the face of Turley's?

Should we just believe the lawyer that says what we want?

I mean really; a person could find a lawyer somewhere that agrees with you on just about anything.

Especially if it garners them massive ad revenue and exposure which just sort of snowballs into lucrative media deals on partison networks?

There should be a way to poll lawyers and get a consensus.

For informational purposes of only of course.

Of Course ultimately if the minority didn't believe what the majority of lawyers said in the above hypothetical poll, they would probably protect their cognitive dissonance with cries of fraud etc.

It is definitely complicated.

Anyhow. Just food for thought.
 
What about lawyers who say the opposite?

Those that think there was nothing wrong with it. Should I believe them or Turley? I can't believe both.

How do we reconcile their views in the face of Turley's?

Should we just believe the lawyer that says what we want?

I mean really; a person could find a lawyer somewhere that agrees with you on just about anything.

Especially if it garners them massive ad revenue and exposure which just sort of snowballs into lucrative media deals on partison networks?

There should be a way to poll lawyers and get a consensus.

For informational purposes of only of course.

Of Course ultimately if the minority didn't believe what the majority of lawyers said in the above hypothetical poll, they would probably protect their cognitive dissonance with cries of fraud etc.

It is definitely complicated.

Anyhow. Just food for thought.
Who are they?
 
We've been here before.

Nothing Turley says has any meaning, He's totally owned by Faux Niwz.
Actually creepypussy, you’re wrong again.

It is improper for a judge to be giving trial “advice” especially to just one side.
 

Forum List

Back
Top