Fogbow

Foggy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 5:52 pm Reality Check, thanks again for the great work posting all those Xits from @InnerCityPress, I read them all with great interest and I felt like I had a good clue about what was going on in the courtroom. You gave us a ton of useful information.

Brad Heath
@bradheath
Collateral estoppel, how does it work?
Quote
Acyn
@Acyn
·
46m
Habba: You are not allowed to be told that you can't bring it up…
6:04 PM · Jan 26, 2024
·
2,157
Views

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 5:49 pm I guess we know what happens now when yer pretty lawyer fakes being smart.

Also...


https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1751008 ... 79768?s=20

Acyn @Acyn wrote: Habba: You are not allowed to be told that you can't bring it up…

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 6:05 pm

Frater I*I wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 6:04 pm Ya know....I'm starting to get the impression that this Habba lady might not be very good at this lawyerin' stuff....

I don't understand how she could have lost. She's pretty, right? Does that not count for anything anymore? What is this America we are living in?

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 5:56 pm https://x.com/mehdirhasan/status/175100 ... 82847?s=20

Mehdi Hasan @mehdirhasan wrote: Much more important than the 83 million dollar verdict is the recognition from a member of the U.S. judiciary that Trump and his supporters remain a violent threat to ordinary Americans.

erica orden @eorden wrote: Judge Kaplan, to jurors: "My advice to you is that you never disclose that you were on this jury."

Brian Manookian @BrianManookian wrote: Let me ruin the suspense for everyone. Trump doesn't have an appeal.

I know the talking heads on TV (who have never tried a case or appealed a jury verdict) have to mention it. Here's why it isn't going to fly.

To have a meritorious appeal, you have to preserve a reversible error at the trial level. This is why you hire competent counsel. You need someone who actually knows the rules of evidence and procedure.

Alina Habba had no clue what was occurring throughout the trial. She not only failed to preserve any remote grounds for appeal, like a moron, she repeatedly and unintentionally waived them over and over.

For example, she kept saying "no objection" as exhibits were entered into evidence.

It appeared to me that she was saying that because she that's something she had heard real lawyers say before.

Unfortunately for Mr. Trump, what she was doing over and over was waiving his ability to appeal over those evidentiary issues. Because she is a moron who would rather *play* lawyer than do the research to *be* a lawyer.

There's no appeal here. And because people have asked me in the past, no, there is no such thing as an incompetent counsel defense in civil cases. That's for criminal matters.

Take this verdict to the bank.

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 6:46 pm Oh, he'll appeal. Grounds? What are those for?

bob wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 4:41 pm $83.3 million total.

Expect, among other post-verdict motions, that $65M is excessive in relation to the $18.3M for actual damages.

(65/18.3 = 3.55, for the math/legal nerds.)

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 6:46 pm ... Grounds? What are those for?

keith wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 8:33 pm I suspect that EJCarroll's chances of collecting anything from the orangeasshole are just about equal to me winning the $200million Australian Powerball jackpot this Thursday.

bob wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 4:41 pm $83.3 million total.

Expect, among other post-verdict motions, that $65M is excessive in relation to the $18.3M for actual damages.

(65/18.3 = 3.55, for the math/legal nerds.)

W. Kevin Vicklund wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 8:54 pm Usually it's capped at 3x compensatory, correct? So likely about $57M after it gets reduced.

AndyinPA wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 4:50 pm I hope he regrets ever coming down those escalator steps.

bob wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 9:22 pm

W. Kevin Vicklund wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 8:54 pm Usually it's capped at 3x compensatory, correct? So likely about $57M after it gets reduced.

For most areas of law, there is no hard cap.

But several courts have seemed to settle on an unofficial rule that anything over 4:1 (and sometimes 3:1) violates due process. But there are outlier cases (on either end).

And there are reasonable policy concerns that wealthy defendants won't be motivated by less-than-painful punitive damages.

bob wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 9:22 pm

W. Kevin Vicklund wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 8:54 pm Usually it's capped at 3x compensatory, correct? So likely about $57M after it gets reduced.

For most areas of law, there is no hard cap.

But several courts have seemed to settle on an unofficial rule that anything over 4:1 (and sometimes 3:1) violates due process. But there are outlier cases (on either end).

And there are reasonable policy concerns that wealthy defendants won't be motivated by less-than-painful punitive damages.

RTH10260 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 10:04 pm Heard by ways of MTN that he started truthing, and he gives himself shocked over this prosecution by Bidens goons, but he totally did not mention any names, no judge, no plaintiff.