Why the Sudden Doubts about the Verdict?

[AntonToo]

Do you grasp the meaning of the term "continuously outside this state"?

Yes, but you don’t.

If I’m out of NY for a month, then that continious time is added to statutes of limitations to bring felony charges against me.

If I’m out of NY for another month later on, then AGAIN a continuous, 1 month absence is added on.

Each and every continuous absence is to be added on.

 

[Man With A Plan]

Yes, but you don’t.

If I’m out of NY for a month, then that continious time is added to statutes of limitations to bring felony charges against me.

If I’m out of NY for another month later on, then AGAIN a continuous, 1 month absence is added on.

Each and every continuous absence is to be added on.

If you're out of NY for a month and then you're back in NY then your absence is not continuous, Anton! That provision is in the law to prevent defendants from leaving the State until the statute of limitations expires to prevent being being brought to court. Trump was in the State of NY probably more than he was in any other State which would have provided prosecutors ample opportunity to bring charges against him!

 

[Care4all]

lsificaiton o


The law makes perfect sense if applied as intended. As you know, since you've done the research, 99.999999999999% of the cases are for criminal fraud. Vast, vast majority are for insurance fraud - defendant burns down his warehouse (crime) and submits a false claim to his insurance company (business record). The prosecution explains to the jury how the defendant falsified the business record (the claim). Prosecution tells the jury how the defendant committed the crime - arson.

What isconfusing and frankly absurd is how Bragg is trying to shoehorn Trump into this statute. His accountants recorded a payment to his lawyer as a legal expense in their internal database (which would have never seen the light of day). THere's no explination or evidence how this record was falsified. The defense, the jury and the public still have no clue as to what the prosecution considers to be a crime, and the defense was never offered the opportunity to rebut this phantom crime. Slam dunk unconstitutional. Not even a close question.

Why you are refusing to see or acknowledge this is odd. You don't seem like the typical Trump hating loon here.

I think there was very strong evidence on how the business records were falsified with Weisselberg hand written notes on the invoice Rawley.....

$130k for stormy, plus $50k for red finch equals $180 k, then doubling the $180 k to $360k, bringing Cohen even on the taxes he would owe because the T Org was falsifying their records on the $130k plus $50k and entered as salary income, instead of a normal expense, plus $60k as a bonus totaled $420k, and divided by 12 months came to the $35 k a month they falsely claimed as retainer fees, for the reimbursement of the stormy hush money etc, Cohen had paid for Trump.

They have the falsifying of business records crime evidence, leaving no doubt on that part imho.

For me, the question is not that.....everyone including Trump knew they were falsifying their business records... but...... was it without any reasonable doubt on whether Trump knew it was to cover up another crime?

 

[brokedickdog]

You make some decent points.

I’d like to zero in on your OJ trial example and point out one sharp difference between the Trump trial and the OJ trial. And almost every other criminal trial for that matter.

In the OJ trial - and almost every criminal trisl - there was no question of the existence of the crime. Two people were hacked to death in a brutal way. A horrible crime that police needed to find the perp.

In the Trump case, the idea is to fit actions by Trump somehow into a crime listed in the New York criminal code. The prosecution has not done that successfully.

All the witnesses except Cohen and “Daniel’s” may have told the truth as they saw it. The defense’s question for them would be “how is that a crime?”

They can’t ask that because the witnesses were not legal experts. They tried bringing in a legal expert but the judge shut that down.

As CNN stated, the most important part of Trumps defense was the cross-examination of Cohen. He’s the only person who tied Trump to acts that the prosecution seeks to criminalize, and Defense attorney Blanche made him admit to lying again,

The media knows this, so they are lowering expectations.

"The Prosecution has pretty well proven that Trump falsified the entries on the corporate books."

Even if that is true it is a misdemeanor. The statute of limitations had expired. Do you know what a statute of limitations is?

They resurrected a dead misdemeanor charge. Then they made up felony charges to only apply to Donald J. Trump.

It is called lawfare. It is failing. Jack Smith's lawfare case is dead.

Do you understand now?

MAGA
TRUMP 2024

 

[AntonToo]

If you're out of NY for a month and then you're back in NY then your absence is not continuous, Anton!

Again, you don't know wtf you are talking about . Absolutely that counts for 1 month continious absence.

But lets also consider how deluded you have to be to imagine that all the legal proffessionals from lawyers to judges somehow didn't notice statutes of limitations running out in this case, but you supposedly know better.

 

[AntonToo]

"The Prosecution has pretty well proven that Trump falsified the entries on the corporate books."

Even if that is true it is a misdemeanor.

WRONG, Trump was charged with fellony because these falsifications had directly to do with violations of campaign and tax laws.

There were three such law violations specified that the judge accepted (out of four presented by the prosecutors) and all jury has to do is agree with at least one of them likely to convict Trump for Flasification of Bussiness Records fellony charges.

 

[Rawley]

I think there was very strong evidence on how the business records were falsified with Weisselberg hand written notes on the invoice Rawley.....

And how does that implicate Trump as falsifying the accounting entries? Beyond a reasonable doubt? DOn't you think there is reason they call him as a witness?

$130k for stormy, plus $50k for red finch equals $180 k, then doubling the $180 k to $360k, bringing Cohen even on the taxes he would owe because the T Org was falsifying their records on the $130k plus $50k and entered as salary income, instead of a normal expense, plus $60k as a bonus totaled $420k, and divided by 12 months came to the $35 k a month they falsely claimed as retainer fees, for the reimbursement of the stormy hush money etc, Cohen had paid for Trump.

WHat's the "false" part?

They have the falsifying of business records crime evidence, leaving no doubt on that part imho.

For me, the question is not that.....everyone including Trump knew they were falsifying their business records...

What evidence convinces you that Trump knew of the "falsification" of records? Weiselberg's notes? Really?

but...... was it without any reasonable doubt on whether Trump knew it was to cover up another crime?

 

[Robert W]

Let's review.
Look who believes in insults? I try to engage you and keep it light hearted. I have tried to reach out to you only to have you get upset and attack me back.
You, You are the one that constantly attacks and accuses me, yes me, of things I don't believe in. You do it constantly.
You say I don't attack (D), yet you refuse to comment about me saying the Harris is Worthless and Biden should dump her. Keep up before you attack me anymore.
You ALSO fail to acknowledge every post where I say I despise ALL politicians, that includes Biden.

or is it that cult grabbed your balls and won't let go of them?
Really, biden doesn't have a CULT, he can barely draw 10 people, how is that a CULT? I have Values, my VALUES rarely follow ANY Corrupt Politician. I'll say it again Robert, FUCK ALL Politicians, especially Trump, because he is a Life Long Con Man.

Maybe you believe to me Trump is perfect??? Because he is definitely not perfect. Can you say this about Biden? Trump hurts himself by some of his talks. Can you admit do does Biden.
Fuck Joe Biden, I just don't need to attack him daily because you guys do that constantly. Check out Nostra, Marvin, Excalibur, You, etc......Daily posts attacking Biden. True or not Robert?
Trump got rich and spent millions to be president. And he worked for free. Biden won't work for free. And Biden uses your money to get him elected.
Wow, trump STOLE from you, you got conned, trump stole from Me, Tax Payer $$$, trump stole from the Government for MILLIONS, thru not dissolving from his businesses like he PROMISED. Fucking con man Robert. But yes, supposedly he donated his $400,000 salary but made MILLIONS conning in other methods.

Trump DIDN'T spend MILLIONS to be President, he took that money from YOU and other CULT members.
And of course in your ignorance you will vote for Biden.

Lastly, you claim to be civil, yet you end with an attack.

I admit that at times I do attack back. I try to hold that in and not let it escape. I have not told you I am not flawed. My complaint about your attacks is stuff you claim that is not true. I did not fund Trump. In fact I get asked daily to fund him and I do not send money to his campaign. You seem to adore attacking Republicans and tell me once in a while you don't vote for Biden. But even above I see no attacks on Biden yet tons of them against Trump. And me too.

 

[Robert W]

WRONG, Trump was charged with fellony because these falsifications had directly to do with violations of campaign and tax laws.

There were three such law violations specified that the judge accepted (out of four presented by the prosecutors) and all jury has to do is agree with at least one of them likely to convict Trump for Flasification of Bussiness Records fellony charges.

Business records are the property of those with the records. You are claiming that Trump did this to fool himself. I listen to lawyers who claim Trump will not be found guilty. If you for instance mark down you drove 100 miles, who are you kidding?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Business records are the property of those with the records. You are claiming that Trump did this to fool himself.

Stupid lies you just made up for attention.

 

[Hollie]

Trump has already sued Cohen for $500 Million. Then he dropped the suit when he found out he'd have to testify in a deposition.

The last thing Trump wants it to have to testify under any circumstances. Because he can't help himself and will lie.

Other than your unsubstantiated piffle, there’s no reason to accept your predictable nonsense claim that,

Because he can't help himself and will lie.

What is predictable is that you will lie because you can’t help yourself.

 

[Seymour Flops]

WRONG, Trump was charged with fellony because these falsifications had directly to do with violations of campaign and tax laws.

There were three such law violations specified that the judge accepted (out of four presented by the prosecutors) and all jury has to do is agree with at least one of them likely to convict Trump for Flasification of Bussiness Records fellony charges.

Interesting.

Do they all have to agree on which one? Or could some say this one, some that one?

I've never heard of a jury being offered this kind of Chinese menu version of jury instructions, so I suppose "Judge" Merchan is breaking new ground, here.

 

[AntonToo]

Business records are the property of those with the records. You are claiming that Trump did this to fool himself. I listen to lawyers who claim Trump will not be found guilty. If you for instance mark down you drove 100 miles, who are you kidding?

Those are ignorant comments…what the hell do you think Bussiness Records laws are about?

General Ledger entries company keeps is not some sort of free for all, these are highly regulated, state audited records and there are specific laws that are broken when a company knowingly enters false records. Penalty for false records of course will vary depending on their scope, up to jail time for first degree offenses.

 

[AntonToo]

Interesting.

Do they all have to agree on which one? Or could some say this one, some that one?

I've never heard of a jury being offered this kind of Chinese menu version of jury instructions, so I suppose "Judge" Merchan is breaking new ground, here.

No they don’t, so long as they believe falsification happened as part of violation of any campaign or tax law.

I’m sure there is a lot you haven’t heard, so that’s not an argument.

 

[Robert W]

Wow you are ignorant.

What the fuck do you think Bussiness Records laws are about?

General Ledger entries company keeps is not some sort of free for all, these are highly regulated, state audited records and there are specific laws that are broken when a company knowingly enters false records. Penalty for false records of course will vary depending on their scope, up to jail time for first degree offenses.

Regulated by Democrats. That is the major problem with them. They are conceived and created by Democrats. I spent years in business and who the hell had a right to my records? It pissed me off to report incomes to the IRS. It is a stripping of freedom that there are other ways for the feds to get revenue and not bother me about reporting to the IRS.

 

[AntonToo]

Regulated by Democrats.

Bussiness records regulations are…a Democrat concept?

If only you knew how fucking dumb and ignorant you sound.

 

[Robert W]

Bussiness records regulations are…a Democrat concept?

If only you knew how fucking dumb and ignorant you sound.

I can track them for you. I believe this shit commenced when FDR was president.
I will not dress turds so your insult is a waste of your time.

 

[AntonToo]

It pissed me off to report incomes to the IRS.

Dumbass, how else do you imagine the state ever collect any bussiness income taxes?

 

[Seymour Flops]

No they don’t, so long as they believe falsification happened as part of violation of any campaign or tax law.

I’m sure there is a lot you haven’t heard, so that’s not an argument.

Feel free to enlighten me on any other cases in which similar "pick a crime, any crime" instructions were given to a criminal jury.

If you don't, I'll assume that you haven't heard of such a case either, regardless of any excuses you make.

 

[AZrailwhale]

I believe and the record shows that the defense did a good job in OJ’s case. They were able to discredit the vital witnesses. Mark Furman as one example. By catching him in a lie on the Stand they cast his entire testimony in doubt. The Defense was brilliant.

When DNA, which was a new thing, was introduced. The Defense attacked it. How accurate is it? One in five million. Oh so in the Los Angeles Basin you are telling me that twenty people would have the same DNA result as OJ?

Not one piece of evidence was allowed to pass unchallenged. Not one bit of testimony was let slide.

The Defense created the reasonable doubt in the minds of the Jury. And that is exactly their job. It is exactly the system we are supposed to have.

In Savannah, the case of Jim Williams was similarly hard fought. And eventually won.

I want to see the intent of the Constitution abided by. I want it hard to convict someone. That is why we have so many amendments specifically protecting the rights of the accused. Our Founders wanted it hard to take away someone’s freedom.

I believe in the old quote by Blackwell. It is better that a thousand guilty men go free than one innocent man go to prison.

That is why I would accept a Not Guilty verdict from the Trump Trial. Because I believe in the intent of our system. I believe that it is supposed to be hard to convict.

The minute the Los Angeles DA moved the trial to the downtown courthouse, OJ won. None of the shenanigans pulled by the defense would have been allowed in the West LA courthouse which was used to dealing with celebrities and the rich and their highly paid attorneys. The jury pools were all vastly different, downtown pulled its juries from almost exclusively minority districts and entirely from poor ones. Jury members tended to be ill-educated and easily swayed by specious arguments from defense lawyers.