Bragg has still not specified the underlying crime that resurrected dead misdemeanors.

[Marener]

They could get ANYONE on “intent”:

No, they really can’t. Stop making shit up.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The jury hasn’t received instructions yet dipshit.

Liar

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No, they really can’t. Stop making shit up.

The way the judge instructed the jury they can

 

[Leo123]

No, they really can’t. Stop making shit up.

Lisa558 was correct. If they can get Trump on what they THOUGHT he was thinking, they can get anyone for their thoughts. Try to comprehend.

 

[Marener]

Liar

That’s tomorrow at 10 AM.

Trump trial live updates: Marathon closing arguments come to an end; jury to receive instructions at 10 a.m.

Attorneys for the prosecution and defense are delivering closing arguments on Tuesday.

www.yahoo.com

 

[Marener]

Lisa558 was correct. If they can get Trump on what they THOUGHT he was thinking, they can get anyone for their thoughts. Try to comprehend.

Juries make decisions about what people intended all the time. It’s the difference between manslaughter and murder, for example.

There are ways to prove intent. You can’t just make it up.

 

[para bellum]

The judge has not given the jury instructions yet, so we shouldn't jump the gun.

He has telegraphed part of it in the charging conference, and it sounds to me like he is going to totally gloss over the "intent to defraud" element with a lame instruction from the CJI.

"INTENT means conscious objective or purpose. Thus, a person acts with intent to defraud when his or her conscious objective or purpose is to do so."

"Intent" is the easy part, it just means someone meant to do what he did.

"Defraud" is the hard part, because criminal fraud always requires a target of the fraud, and some advantage gained by the person committing the fraud.

The only target the prosecution has identified is "the people of the United States", and that just doesn't cut it as far as criminal fraud goes.

So tomorrow Merchan will give the jury charge, and we will know what they are supposed to be deciding. Until then we are just guessing.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

That’s tomorrow at 10 AM.

Trump trial live updates: Marathon closing arguments come to an end; jury to receive instructions at 10 a.m.

Attorneys for the prosecution and defense are delivering closing arguments on Tuesday.

www.yahoo.com

Numbnuts I recall you said you watched the trail.

Judge tells jurors they must disregard 'improper' comment from Trump's lawyer that they shouldn't send him to prison

NEW YORK (AP) — Judge tells jurors they must disregard 'improper' comment from Trump's lawyer that they shouldn't send him to prison.

www.the-journal.com

 

[Marener]

Numbnuts I recall you said you watched the trail.

Those aren’t jury instructions, dipshit.

Good god, you’re even dumber than I thought.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Those aren’t jury instructions, dipshit.

Good god, you’re even dumber than I thought.

Did the judge instruct the jury to do something?

 

[Papageorgio]

Three possibilities.

Federal campaign finance violation
State campaign laws
State tax violation

So which has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt?

 

[Lisa558]

Lisa558 was correct. If they can get Trump on what they THOUGHT he was thinking, they can get anyone for their thoughts. Try to comprehend.

The other thing with “intent” is that it has been used in the opposite way: to excuse people from wrongdoing because they didn’t INTEND to break the law. A prime example is Hillary’s taking classified documents: Comey let her off because she didn‘t INTEND to do it,

 

[Marener]

So which has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt?

they don’t have to prove any of them beyond a reasonable doubt.

There is precedent for this.

They just have to prove intent to commit one.

 

[Marener]

Lotta conservatives on here with very poor knowledge of the law and this case.

Their media doesn’t respect them enough to treat them like adults and explain complicated topics.

 

[Lisa558]

Juries make decisions about what people intended all the time. It’s the difference between manslaughter and murder, for example.

There are ways to prove intent. You can’t just make it up.

It is almost impossible to prove intent, as I learned when I was on a jury. The exception is if the jury is made up of people like you, who already determined they were going to find Trump guilty of SOMETHING.

 

[Lisa558]

they don’t have to prove any of them beyond a reasonable doubt.

There is precedent for this.

They just have to prove intent to commit one.

Reasonable doubt is the standard.

Preponderance of the evidence is the standard for civil infractions - like the wrong entry on books. But that’s a misdemeanor, and Trump is not being charged with that. The statute of limitations has run out.

 

[Lisa558]

Lotta conservatives on here with very poor knowledge of the law and this case.

Their media doesn’t respect them enough to treat them like adults and explain complicated topics.

Lotta leftists on this site willing to believe in North Korea tactics if it means it will hurt Trump, and keep him off the campaign trail.

 

[Leo123]

they don’t have to prove any of them beyond a reasonable doubt.

There is precedent for this.

They just have to prove intent to commit one.

So, Trump (according to Cohen) had no knowledge of the payoff. Cohen said he paid the hush money all by himself. Where is the evidence of intent on Trump's part and, there is no evidence even if Trump paid by himself he did it for any other reason that for his own private reasons. You have to have some real evidence, not insinuations.

 

[para bellum]

Did the judge instruct the jury to do something?

Only regarding a comment made by someone in the courtroom. That happens every day in the trial.

The comment by Blanche was probably uncalled for, but the prosecution has gotten away with a lot worse, so oh well, haha.

 

[Marener]

It is almost impossible to prove intent, as I learned when I was on a jury. The exception is if the jury is made up of people like you, who already determined they were going to find Trump guilty of SOMETHING.

No, it’s not almost impossible and is necessary to prosecute many crimes. If it were almost impossible, tons of criminals would go free.