Bragg Manhattan DA charges tfg? Hush money. tfg “INDICATED!” - CONVICTED!!

[raison de arizona]

Last time tfg was required in court, Ivana fell down some stairs and died. Appearance delayed.

Just saying.

[Volkonski]

Protests, Traffic, Crowds: Court Braces for a Trump Trial Like No Other
Strict security measures — and plenty of headaches — are expected as the first criminal trial of a former U.S. president gets underway in Manhattan.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/13/nyre ... tests.html

Manhattan’s Criminal Courts Building, at 100 Centre Street, is short on charm: circled in scaffolding, lit like an aging cafeteria and, in recent months, neighbor to a colossal pile of rubble, the remains of the Manhattan Detention Complex, which is being demolished.

Yet come Monday, it will be the pulsing center of a swirling mass of security measures, and likely headaches, as the first criminal trial of Donald J. Trump kicks off on its 15th floor.

Court and law enforcement personnel have been tight-lipped about the exact steps they are taking, but a court lawyer said at a hearing this week that preparations had been underway for months.

They will have plenty to contend with. Right-wing supporters of the former president have already announced plans to protest near the courthouse on Monday as jury selection begins, and cable news networks have promised wall-to-wall coverage of the case.

Security for Mr. Trump, who is being tried on charges that he falsified business records to cover up a hush-money payment to a porn star ahead of the 2016 election, will undoubtedly be high. Strict protective measures will also be in place for Alvin L. Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney who brought the case, and Juan M. Merchan, the judge who is trying it.

Though Mr. Trump is required to be in court every day it is in session, he can ask the judge and prosecutors to excuse him if he wishes to be absent.

On the other hand, the former president also suggested on Friday that he would testify in the case, telling reporters that he would “tell the truth” and that prosecutors “have no case.” (Then again, Mr. Trump has promised to testify in previous cases only to waver and back out.)

But when Mr. Trump is at 100 Centre, his presence — and the media frenzy that surrounds it — could snarl traffic throughout Lower Manhattan, as well as anywhere his motorcade travels, including his route to court from his Midtown home at Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue.

[Dr. Ken]

Already attacking a witness

[Volkonski]

Former NY prosecutor on Trump hush money trial: ‘He’s going to have to sit there’

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-ba ... press.coop

Former Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Catherine Christian said she will be closely monitoring former President Trump’s behavior in his first criminal trial, scheduled for Monday.

Christian noted that unlike his previous civil trials, Trump will “have to sit there” and hear the things hey may not want to.

“I will be watching for Donald Trump’s behavior,” Christian said Saturday on MSNBC’s “Meet the Press Now.” “Unlike the civil case of E. Jean Carroll, where he got up and walked out the courtroom because he didn’t like what he was hearing, he can’t do that in a criminal trial. No one can do that.”

“None of the prosecutors, the defense attorneys or Donald Trump,” she continued. “He’s going to have to sit there. He will only be able to leave when there’s a break.”

Despite his attempts to get the case delayed past the November election, Trump’s hush money trial is set to begin Monday with jury selection. The highly publicized case will bring eyes to the courtroom as the first criminal trial of a former president.

The case is set to have two key witnesses: Adult film star Stormy Daniels and Trump’s former fixer Michael Cohen. The case alleges the former president illegally falsified business records reimbursing Cohen for paying Daniels to conceal an alleged affair ahead of the 2016 presidential election.

Trump has lashed out at Judge Juan Merchan, his daughter and others in the case, even after he was hit with a gag order. Christian wondered on air if Trump will “be able to remember” the order during the trial if he gets upset.

“Will he be able to refrain from doing that? Will he be able to refrain from making statements about prospective witnesses? Will he be able to refrain from making statements about the [District Attorney’s] staff?” she questioned.

[bob]

New: Trump wants a record of potential jurors who say they cannot serve because they’re too biased.

The idea is to support any later Trump appeal (ex. to move the trial).

... and?

Improper dismissal of prospective jurors is a routine issue for appeals.

1. Don't stipulate to the dismissal of any prospective juror.

2. Make a record as to each prospective juror's possible biases, to later show the judge was wrong in concluding the judge was wrong when the judges dismissed a juror as too biased.*

Improper dismissal of a prospective juror is a hard issue to win on appeal. And a good judge knows how to protect the record.

And saying there should have been a change of venue because the prospective jury pool was too biased is even more of a longshot on appeal.

* Technically, it isn't whether the juror is biased. It is whether the juror can set aside any biases. But the stronger the bias, the less likely it can be set aside

[noblepa]

I like the way Judge Merchan politely points out that it stinks for Trump to complain about publicity when he enthusiastically generated much of it himself, often immediately outside the courthouse.

True. That sounds a little like a corollary to the old joke about the guy who, charged with murdering his parents, throws himself on the mercy of the court, claiming that he is an orphan.

[noblepa]

If he says he was exposed, give him a test. If it's neg, make him wear a mask in court for a few days until he has 3-4 days of neg tests (which he will bc he'll have lied about it). Problem solved.

I believe that most courtrooms are equipped with audio/video equipment to allow an unruly defendant to "attend" his/her trial remotely. He could simply be shown to one of those rooms and given a mask.

[noblepa]

I don't quite understand why Stormy Daniels is testifying.

There is no question that he slept with her.

There is no question that he paid her to keep quiet about it. This is not even illegal, unless it is done to further a criminal conspiracy.

As I understand it, the trial is about violating business record keeping and accounting laws, specifically that he fraudulently misrepresented the payments on the books of the Trump Organization.

Ms. Daniels has no knowledge of those actions.

[bob]

There is no question that he slept with her.

There is no question that he paid her to keep quiet about it.

The defendant has repeatedly and explicitly denied both of these allegations.

The defendant's intent and state of mind are key to this trial.

This is not even illegal, unless it is done to further a criminal conspiracy.

As the defendant will soon learn, falsifying a company's records is indeed a crime. Daniels' testimony is relevant because it will prove predicate facts.

[noblepa]

There is no question that he slept with her.

There is no question that he paid her to keep quiet about it.

The defendant has repeatedly and explicitly denied both of these allegations.

The defendant's intent and state of mind are key to this trial.

This is not even illegal, unless it is done to further a criminal conspiracy.

As the defendant will soon learn, falsifying a company's records is indeed a crime. Daniels' testimony is relevant because it will prove predicate facts.

Yes, but weren't the payments adjudicated to have been made, back in the Michael Cohen trial? So, legally, can he deny them in this trial?

My point was that, as you say, falsifying business records is the crime he is charged with.

On a slightly different note, what is the maximum penalty that can be imposed? Prison time? A stiff fine (which he will find someone else to pay)? Probation? What is most likely?

[p0rtia]

In addition to giving the details of the negotiations with Pecker and Cohen, thus supporting Cohen's testimony, I reckon her understanding of the timing of the payment, i.e., to keep her story out of the papers just after the Access Hollywood tape and up to the election, will support the election law violation part of the case. Which is the big fish.

If the jury rejects the election law violation part of the story, it's not a felony. Note that, in part, Cohen was convictedof election law violation for his role in the falsification of the records. So it'll be pretty cute if fuckhead gets off on the count that Cohen went to jail for.

[bob]

Yes, but weren't the payments adjudicated to have been made, back in the Michael Cohen trial? So, legally, can he deny them in this trial?

What happened at Cohen's trial has no preclusive effect on his trial. And one of his defenses is that Cohen is a liar.

More basically, it is the prosecutor's burden to prove every element of every crime charged. Which includes supplying supporting evidence, including circumstantial evidence.

My point was that, as you say, falsifying business records is the crime he is charged with.

And a necessary predicate fact is that the records were, in fact, false. Because the payments ("allegedly") were for other services rendered, and not for the services annotated in the business records.

On a slightly different note, what is the maximum penalty that can be imposed? Prison time? A stiff fine (which he will find someone else to pay)? Probation? What is most likely?

Each count carries a 0-4 year term.

Given that the crime did not involve violence, and would be his first criminal conviction, my WAG would be probation, with the threat of imprisonment if he didn't comply. Even if the judge did impose jail (or prison) right off the bat, I would expect that to be stayed pending appeal.

[Sam the Centipede]

bob, I love you, I love your expertise, I love your generosity in sharing that expertise, but sometimes I wish that expertise wasn't continually deployed in delivering disappointment, dashing hopes, squashing fallacies and dismantling faulty reasoning!

But better to live in the dreary resignment than false hope. That's why we're not birthers.

Keep at it!!!

[RVInit]

bob, I love you, I love your expertise, I love your generosity in sharing that expertise, but sometimes I wish that expertise wasn't continually deployed in delivering disappointment, dashing hopes, squashing fallacies and dismantling faulty reasoning!

But better to live in the dreary resignment than false hope. That's why we're not birthers.

Keep at it!!!

Much better to face reality than hold on to false beliefs and suffer disappointment.

[SuzieC]

There will be conditions of probation. I never practiced criminal law, but I believe that if he violates conditions, he can be hauled off to jail without the need for a hearing.

I wish fierce red panda was still here.

[bob]

There will be conditions of probation. I never practiced criminal law, but I believe that if he violates conditions, he can be hauled off to jail without the need for a hearing.

If probation violations are alleged, there will be a hearing to adjudicate the allegations. (The standard of proof is less, and there's no right to a jury.)

Detention before a hearing, of course, is possible.

[chancery]

Terri Kanefield has posted her take on the coming trial: https://terikanefield.com/sex-lies-and- ... documents/

Kanefield is a sober and reliable commentator on criminal law issues, as well as litigation generally. As usual, she's not nearly as sanguine as the members of what she calls the "left-leaning-social media-cable-news-shows industry," whose posts are frequently quoted on TFB.

Recommended.

[Ben-Prime]

Last time tfg was required in court, Ivana fell down some stairs and died. Appearance delayed.

Just saying.

They'll go in order of least valued family. If I were Eric or Tiffany, I'd be really worried right now.

[Ben-Prime]

If he says he was exposed, give him a test. If it's neg, make him wear a mask in court for a few days until he has 3-4 days of neg tests (which he will bc he'll have lied about it). Problem solved.

I believe that most courtrooms are equipped with audio/video equipment to allow an unruly defendant to "attend" his/her trial remotely. He could simply be shown to one of those rooms and given a mask.

With the added bonus of being able to kill his audio if he starts ranting.

[Rolodex]

If he says he was exposed, give him a test. If it's neg, make him wear a mask in court for a few days until he has 3-4 days of neg tests (which he will bc he'll have lied about it). Problem solved.

I believe that most courtrooms are equipped with audio/video equipment to allow an unruly defendant to "attend" his/her trial remotely. He could simply be shown to one of those rooms and given a mask.

With the added bonus of being able to kill his audio if he starts ranting.

Like the guy who killed people running them down in the Christmas parade. That trial was wild. I started laughing out loud when he got moved to another room and built a fort of boxes in front of him to block the camera.

[New Turtle]

I don't quite understand why Stormy Daniels is testifying.

There is no question that he slept with her.

There is no question that he paid her to keep quiet about it. This is not even illegal, unless it is done to further a criminal conspiracy.

As I understand it, the trial is about violating business record keeping and accounting laws, specifically that he fraudulently misrepresented the payments on the books of the Trump Organization.

Ms. Daniels has no knowledge of those actions.

Their case is built on documents, so the prosecutor will probably hold up the check and ask if she signed, hold up the NDA and ask if she signed, etc., and also ask if she did any work for the 2016 campaign.

[New Turtle]

There will be conditions of probation. I never practiced criminal law, but I believe that if he violates conditions, he can be hauled off to jail without the need for a hearing.

I wish fierce red panda was still here.

IANAL, but I've seen this happen to people before.

In some jurisdictions, this can happen for parole violations. The parole officer cannot unilaterally revoke a parole, but they can issue a violation and have the parolee held in local lockup until they are transferred to a state facility where they are to appear before a revocation board. This process could take hours, days or weeks.

There is no court interaction and no bond because in these jurisdictions, the violation itself is between the parolee and the state DOC/Parole board. Someone on parole is still serving their sentence, just outside the walls. If they get their parole revoked halfway through their sentence, they go back in to complete it while maybe trying to get back out.

Probation is different because it is administered through the courts in lieu of jail time. Someone who agrees to probation has to sign a waiver giving the court permission for the probation officer to enter their home without a warrant, etc. Also they have to agree to no criming while on probation. (not even a contempt of court charge). There is a jail sentence involved, but it is suspended until the court is sure the offender has completed the probation agreement. In some jurisdictions, violation of probation is a criminal charge brought by the probation officer, so they go through regular due process with a court date and probably a bond. The difference with probation, if someone gets halfway through the probation and gets it revoked, they can be on the hook for the whole sentence.

[Sam the Centipede]

Terri Kanefield has posted her take on the coming trial: https://terikanefield.com/sex-lies-and- ... documents/

Kanefield is a sober and reliable commentator on criminal law issues, as well as litigation generally. As usual, she's not nearly as sanguine as the members of what she calls the "left-leaning-social media-cable-news-shows industry," whose posts are frequently quoted on TFB.

Recommended.

Yes, definitely an interesting piece. Thanks for the link.

Kanefield is indeed gently rude about the anti-Trump optimists. Her analysis about proving the required mens rea is informative. As Trump is a rich white man with a platoon of lawyers he might well be able to skate a felony verdict for these misdeeds, we'll see.

Even if Trump skates, he will at least have had his feet held uncomfortably to the fire for a while. He deserves the torment.

[Kendra]

If anyone cares, Bartiromo is going to have Jonathan Turkey on later in the hour to talk about this. Should be

[Tiredretiredlawyer]