The actual Trump indictment in NY text

[excalibur]

It depends on what those records were used for. If it was to evade taxes, that's a crime. If it was to keep negative information out of the media, that's not a crime.

Has he been charged with a tax violation? No.

 

[Natural Citizen]

that information itself is what?

Releasing that information prior to unsealing the indictment is crime. A felony, in fact.

So. Again. I'm curious as to who leaked it. It's a valid question. Particularly given that this is clearly a loaded show trial.

As to the indictment itself, there's no crime even mentioned in any of these 34 charges. This indictment completely failed to tell the defendent what ''other crime'' he was trying to cover up.

 

[Blaster]

A very weak case by Braggs.

 

[excalibur]

Yup, clear as day. 175.10 is the only code cited. Yet 175.10 clearly states that the first degree requires guilt of the second degree.

Yep.

§ 175.10 Falsifying business records in the first degree.
A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree
when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second
degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit
another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.​

NYS Open Legislation | NYSenate.gov

www.nysenate.gov

 

[BackAgain]

Who is the complainant? These are Trump's businesses.

The complainant, technically, in every criminal case is the “People.” It is in the Name of the People that all crimes are prosecuted in NY. It is their laws which are allegedly broken.

 

[L.K.Eder]

Yeah, give a lawyer a desired outcome, and he can conger up a crime.
Not that hard to do.

conger, eh?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Yes.

No.

But, you miss the point.

The statute of limitations expired for any misdemeanor. The purpose for making a false entry HAS TO BE to conceal some OTHER crime in order to make it a felony.

And I guess time will tell if that was the case.

I know you have already made up your mind.

I am looking forward to the next few months and seeing how it all turns out.

I am skeptical of any charges sticking, but as I said, time will tell.

 

[excalibur]

The complainant, technically, in every criminal case is the “People.” It is in the Name of the People that all crimes are prosecuted in NY. It is their laws which are allegedly broken.

But there needs to be a complainant who brought this to their attention. ANd such complainant must have suffered some loss.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Anyway. Trump will walk.

This prosecutor is a donut. Clearly. lolol...

 

[Nostra]

https://www.manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Donald-J.-Trump-Indictment.pdf

So now we no longer have to speculate.

Bragg got the GJ to charge 34 counts.

It’s all alleging a “scheme” to “conceal” alleged negative information about Trump as the illegal purpose for falsifying business records.

As predicted. It’s bullshit.

34 NOTHINGBURGERS.

 

[Nostra]

Bragg doesn’t even list the crime Trump was allegedly trying to cover up, as required..

It should be thrown out .

 

[marvin martian]

Has he been charged with a tax violation? No.

Exactly.

 

[BackAgain]

And Braggadocio never identifies the other crime. He was asked what the other crime was. He said that he is not required to identify any crimes. That's what an indictment IS.

He is technically and legally correct. NY State law doesn’t require that an indictment set forth the “other” crime or crimes. That isn’t an element that has to be independently proved.

If we get to a point where citizens get before a judge and charged with "unspecified crime", we are in huge trouble.

Sort of. But not always. For instance, if an indictment charges a crime of burglary in NY. That means that a person illegally enters or remains in a building (say a home) “with the intent to commit a crime therein.” But the prosecution doesn’t have to specify what that intended crime might be. It could be theft. It could be rape. It could be assault. Whatever.

The prosecutor has to somehow prove that the defendant had such an intent but doesn’t have to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Bragg doesn’t even list the crime Trump was allegedly trying to cover up, as required..

It should be thrown out .

Exactly! Thank You...

 

[Samofvt]

Does it matter why the false business records were made?

You're already repeating misinformation...

FIRST you need to prove the records were false. NEXT you will need to prove it was intentional. THEN you will have to prove there is evidence that those records are directly a part of the campaign in 2016.

The burden of proof lies on the prosecutor, and it has to be beyond the shadow of a doubt.

 

[Dante Reawakened]

Wait! I see where Bragg made political statements in his press conference.

He did so when he mentioned Trump attempting to hide facts from the American voter. Which I believe we all know is true.

 

[Dante Reawakened]

Exactly! Thank You...

really?

 

[Natural Citizen]

You can't not tell a defendent what he or she is being charged with.

That turns the entire framework of Legal justice on its head.

By not telling the defendant what he's being charged with, the prosecutor is clearly stalling until one of the other cases ''finds a crime'' that he might think he can work with.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Well, the Trump lawyers are saying it's nothing and a joke and CNN/MSNBC are acting like its huuuuuuge.

And we're off and running.

Do you know what else CNN/MSNBC told you gullible groomed loons was huge?

Trump colluded with the Russians.

 

[Dante Reawakened]

Yup, clear as day. 175.10 is the only code cited. Yet 175.10 clearly states that the first degree requires guilt of the second degree.

Only code cited during a press conference?

So we still do know what he filed with the court?