Fogbow

Donald Trump is scheduled to attend his second court hearing as a criminal defendant Tuesday, but it will be a far different scene than his previous appearance.

When he went to court in New York City on April 4, it was the first time in American history a former president was arraigned for a crime. The office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg unsealed a 34-count felony indictment that day, alleging falsification of business records, and Trump entered a not guilty plea.

This time, instead of the dozens of court officers and Secret Service agents who flanked Trump during his arraignment, he'll appear via live video fed into the same courtroom he walked into last month. It will be the first time in American history a former president has appeared virtually for a criminal court hearing.

New York Judge Juan Merchan is expected to explain to Trump the terms of a protective order he issued for much of the evidence prosecutors will give to the defense as part of the case. During a May 4 hearing that Trump was not required to attend, Merchan called the order "standard" but acknowledged it bears unusual significance for Trump, who is running for president.

The order largely bars Trump from publicizing any material that had not already been made public once it's turned over by prosecutors to his team. Merchan wrote in the May 8 order that Trump will only have access to certain information, labeled "Limited Dissemination Materials" by prosecutors, in the presence of his attorneys. He will not be allowed to make copy, photograph or transcribe those documents.

much ado wrote: ↑Mon May 22, 2023 9:13 pm Will the public get to see the video of Trump being schooled by the judge?

Inner City Press
@innercitypress
Thanks! I'm not sure how this afternoon's state Trump case will go - for now, waiting in line outside Judge Merchan's 15th floor courtroom. If Trump is to appear by video from Mar-a-Lago, why isn't the proceeding available to the public and press by video?

Important that Trump, himself, has acknowledged having possession of the protective order AND his lawyer advising Judge Merchan that he has discussed it with Trump "at length."

No room for confusion there.

Kendra wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 3:12 pm https://twitter.com/KatiePhang/status/1 ... 2893721600

Important that Trump, himself, has acknowledged having possession of the protective order AND his lawyer advising Judge Merchan that he has discussed it with Trump "at length."

No room for confusion there.

Kendra wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 2:08 pm

Inner City Press
@innercitypress
Thanks! I'm not sure how this afternoon's state Trump case will go - for now, waiting in line outside Judge Merchan's 15th floor courtroom. If Trump is to appear by video from Mar-a-Lago, why isn't the proceeding available to the public and press by video?

We got at least one reporter in line for the courtroom.

Edit:

p0rtia wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 7:27 pm Judge M didn't specify civil or criminal contempt, did he?

Judge Merchan: I don't think there's any need to be line by line through the protective order, based on your representation.
Blanche: I agree.
Judge Merchan: Did you explain to your client this order is a mandate of the court?
Blanche: He understands
Judge Merchan: Violation of the order could result in a finding of contempt. Anything further?
No. No.

much ado wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 9:28 pm Great to see you here, Estiveo!

"Not limited to criminal contempt"?

What does that open the door to?

Estiveo wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 9:43 pm

much ado wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 9:28 pm Great to see you here, Estiveo!

"Not limited to criminal contempt"?

What does that open the door to?

Maybe a full on gag order & promise of a weekend in the tombs?

1. Except as provided in subdivisions (2), (3) and (4), punishment for a contempt, specified in section seven hundred fifty, may be by fine, not exceeding one thousand dollars, or by imprisonment, not exceeding thirty days, in the jail of the county where the court is sitting, or both, in the discretion of the court.  Where the punishment for contempt is based on a violation of an order of protection issued under section 530.12 or 530.13 of the criminal procedure law, imprisonment may be for a term not exceeding three months.  Where a person is committed to jail, for the nonpayment of a fine, imposed under this section, he must be discharged at the expiration of thirty days;  but where he is also committed for a definite time, the thirty days must be computed from the expiration of the definite time.

Such a contempt, committed in the immediate view and presence of the court, may be punished summarily;  when not so committed, the party charged must be notified of the accusation, and have a reasonable time to make a defense.

much ado wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 10:35 pm I looked up the statute for criminal contempt in the State of New York.

New York Consolidated Laws, Judiciary Law - JUD § 751. Punishment for criminal contempts

1. Except as provided in subdivisions (2), (3) and (4), punishment for a contempt, specified in section seven hundred fifty, may be by fine, not exceeding one thousand dollars, or by imprisonment, not exceeding thirty days, in the jail of the county where the court is sitting, or both, in the discretion of the court.  Where the punishment for contempt is based on a violation of an order of protection issued under section 530.12 or 530.13 of the criminal procedure law, imprisonment may be for a term not exceeding three months.  Where a person is committed to jail, for the nonpayment of a fine, imposed under this section, he must be discharged at the expiration of thirty days;  but where he is also committed for a definite time, the thirty days must be computed from the expiration of the definite time.

Such a contempt, committed in the immediate view and presence of the court, may be punished summarily;  when not so committed, the party charged must be notified of the accusation, and have a reasonable time to make a defense.

Trump might notice a few days in the county jail.

(Lock him up!)

Estiveo wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 8:30 pm Per Lisa Rubin at MSNBC, the judge said violation of the order could bring sanctions including, but not limited to, criminal contempt.

I hope that pans out when TFG violates the order, which we all know he will, if he hasn't already.