Fogbow

New Turtle wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 3:39 pm One thing the judge said today while the defense was trying to get their expert witness approved, the charge that makes the other charges a felony, they don't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, they can get a conviction on circumstantial evidence. I'm sure since he said it, he will put that in the jury instructions.

Interesting. I'll have to go look that up once there's a transcript. I find it hard to believe if they find him guilty it doesn't have to be beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the bar in criminal cases. Sounds odd, but that's just me.

That said, the vast majority of criminal convictions are obtained on circumstantial evidence.

realist wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 4:53 pm

New Turtle wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 3:39 pm One thing the judge said today while the defense was trying to get their expert witness approved, the charge that makes the other charges a felony, they don't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, they can get a conviction on circumstantial evidence. I'm sure since he said it, he will put that in the jury instructions.

Interesting. I'll have to go look that up once there's a transcript. I find it hard to believe if they find him guilty it doesn't have to be beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the bar in criminal cases. Sounds odd, but that's just me.

That said, the vast majority of criminal convictions are obtained on circumstantial evidence.

He said it in the early part of the day, before the jury entered.

katiephang
7h
JUDGE MERCHAN: “I can tell you when it comes to these types of matters, “I often think less is better”. You must remember the People are not required to prove these offenses [the ones that make it a felony] beyond a reasonable doubt.”

https://www.threads.net/@katiephang/post/C7MV341LCGk

Ol' Wifehorn is reporting that Merchan cleared the courtroom three times trying to get control of Costello. That's gonna leave a mark.

New Turtle wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 5:36 pm JUDGE MERCHAN: “I can tell you when it comes to these types of matters, “I often think less is better”. You must remember the People are not required to prove these offenses [the ones that make it a felony] beyond a reasonable doubt.”

This is interesting.

1. It goes to Stern's point, as the conspiracy is the target offense that could bump this from a misdemeanor to a felony.

2. The ruling that the prosecution doesn't have to prove the existence of the conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt seems ... curious.

2a. Even if the trial court is wrong on this, it probably will be error-but-harmless-(beyond-a-reasonable-doubt) on appeal.

* * *

Foggy wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 5:49 pm Ol' Wifehorn is reporting that Merchan cleared the courtroom three times trying to get control of Costello. That's going to make a big impression on the jury.

I'm sure the judge will instruct the jury not to speculate about why the courtroom was being cleared. And I'm sure they won't.

The State does not have to prove the underlying felony beyond a reasonable doubt.

bob wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 5:50 pm I'm sure the judge will instruct the jury not to speculate about why the courtroom was being cleared.

Why would they need to speculate? Upthread, the story is that Merchan said, "Are you trying to stare me down? CLEAR THE COURTROOM!"

That sounds like nobody really needs to speculate. Costello was called to break the rules for Trump, because Trump can't take the stand. But Costello is destroyed as a witness after this afternoon.

I really think Costello might find himself charged with criminal contempt of court. He may be dead center at the / in the FA/FO meme.

Lawfare did a long and detailed explainer on this burden of proof question:

What must prosecutors prove in Trump's NY Trial?

It says there is NY case law supporting idea that while prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that falsifcation was done with INTENT to conceal another crime (the "object offense"), they do not have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the object offense was committed.

It also discuss another fine question: Merchan allowed prosecution to pursue three different theories of the object offense: the NY conspiracy to influence election, Federal Campaign finance law, and Tax Fraud. Does a jury have to be unanimous on which of these the intent was for in order to convict on the felony falsification? ETA: the piece notes that the prosecution may wind up putting all their eggs in the NY election conspiracy basket and obviate this issue.

Anyway, read the post if interested.

Maybenaut wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 5:51 pm The State does not have to prove the underlying felony beyond a reasonable doubt.

And the object offense need not even be a felony to bump the records falsification up to a felony. From the lawfare explainer I gather NY election law 17-152 being used defines a misdemeanor.

Maybenaut wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 5:51 pm The State does not have to prove the underlying felony beyond a reasonable doubt.

Ahh, because the element is an intent to commit the underlying offense. No additional evidence is required to prove that the underlying offense actually happened. Or even there was an attempt to make it happen, but evidence of an attempt would be good evidence of intent.

I'm very jealous of this jury, which has been highly entertained with a huge stinky mess all over the place. However, I do wonder if Donald is fully aware that the jury will decide his future. He may be delusional enough that he will try to fire some of the jurors, Celebrity Apprentice-style. He probably loved Robert Costello's performance art, the way he loved Kavanaugh's performance art.

But is Blanche explaining to him that his witness was a disaster?

Foggy wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 6:21 pm I'm very jealous of this jury, which has been highly entertained with a huge stinky mess all over the place. However, I do wonder if Donald is fully aware that the jury will decide his future. He may be delusional enough that he will try to fire some of the jurors, Celebrity Apprentice-style. He probably loved Robert Costello's performance art, the way he loved Kavanaugh's performance art.

But is Blanche explaining to him that his witness was a disaster?

Just a quick note on Costello: i picked up a discussion point (on MTN?) that defendant lawyers did not want to question this guy but their paymaster insited on having him on the stand.

It's been a few years, but I once was seated on a jury, it was a battery charge and things were heated and we jurors were constantly sent to the jury room while the lawyers argued with the judge. Multiple times in a day. It finally ended up in a mistrial, but before that happened I can assure you that we jurors were so frustrated on being stuck there, but not able to do our jobs.

Toeing the line, tfg can't help himself!

Acyn @Acyn wrote: Trump testing the gag order again: He stole from The Trump Organization

RTH10260 wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 6:40 pm Just a quick note on Costello: i picked up a discussion point (on MTN?) that defendant lawyers did not want to question this guy but their paymaster insited on having him on the stand.

I also saw that somewhere. Apparently Trump likes his attitude and thinks he is a "fighter."

SuzieC wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 8:01 pm

RTH10260 wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 6:40 pm Just a quick note on Costello: i picked up a discussion point (on MTN?) that defendant lawyers did not want to question this guy but their paymaster insited on having him on the stand.

I also saw that somewhere. Apparently Trump likes his attitude and thinks he is a "fighter."

Yeah, and just like Trump, he is a loser.

SuzieC wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 8:01 pm

RTH10260 wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 6:40 pm Just a quick note on Costello: i picked up a discussion point (on MTN?) that defendant lawyers did not want to question this guy but their paymaster insited on having him on the stand.

I also saw that somewhere. Apparently Trump likes his attitude and thinks he is a "fighter."

This guy got lost in my trumptrials index cards. Who exactly is Costello, what does he have to do with this case; why was he there/what was his role?

https://x.com/kaitlancollins/status/1792701064254238975

Kaitlan Collins wrote: What happened inside the courtroom when the press was kicked out as Judge Merchan admonished Robert Costello:

Judge Merchan: "Sir, your conduct is contemptuous right now. I'm putting you on notice that your conduct is contemptuous. If you try to stare me down one more time, I will remove you from the stand. I will strike his entire testimony; do you understand me?"

MR. BOVE: "Yes, Judge. I understand."

When Costello asked if he could say something, Merchan said: "No. No. This is not a conversation."

Rolodex wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 8:18 pm

SuzieC wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 8:01 pm

RTH10260 wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 6:40 pm Just a quick note on Costello: i picked up a discussion point (on MTN?) that defendant lawyers did not want to question this guy but their paymaster insited on having him on the stand.

I also saw that somewhere. Apparently Trump likes his attitude and thinks he is a "fighter."

This guy got lost in my trumptrials index cards. Who exactly is Costello, what does he have to do with this case; why was he there/what was his role?

Costello was tight with Cohen, and claims Cohen told him tfg knew nothing of the payments, that he (Cohen) made them out of the goodness of his heart due to his enormous respect for Melania and his desire to not see her harmed. Among other silly things.

I suspect that cross-examination of Costello is gonna be brutal. What's the over/under on the number of times Merchan has to clear the courtroom to yell at the assholes?

Mr. Costello, you're an attorney, correct? So you have some minimal idea of how to behave in court, in front of a judge, is that correct?

'Course, that will elicit a speech, so the prosecutor may have to ask it six or nine times before he gets the answer "Yes".

Fuller transcript of Merchan-Costello exchange depicted in this tweet:

Huh. Imagine an attorney who behaves like this is known for working for mobsters.