• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Trump's Conviction and the 6th Amendment.

Clizby Wampuscat

Well-Known Member
Trump was convicted of 34 felonies that have a max sentencing of 100+ years in jail with the defendant not knowing what crime he was convicted of. Think about that.

The conspiracy was not defined in the indictment

The conspiracy was not defined in the trial

The conspiracy was not defined by the jury after the verdict

The jury was told that they did not need to be unanimous on what the second crime was. instead they were given three possibilities, not defined by the prosecution, to pick from. Each juror could have a different crime and still convict him of all 34 felonies.

This is not justice. The 6th amendment of the constitution says:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Trump was not informed of the nature of the accusation, this is not justice but authoritarianism. This has to be overturned, his rights were violated and anyone who is for justice should agree.

There were various other problems as well that will be overturned if justice can still be done in New York. Does anyone honestly believe that Biden would have been charged with these crimes if Bragg had the same evidence against him?

"It is never the law itself that is in the wrong; it is always some wicked interpreter of the law that has corrupted and abused it." ~ .Jeremy Bentham,
 

Pogo

Well-Known Member
Trump was convicted of 34 felonies that have a max sentencing of 100+ years in jail with the defendant not knowing what crime he was convicted of. Think about that.

The conspiracy was not defined in the indictment

The conspiracy was not defined in the trial

The conspiracy was not defined by the jury after the verdict

The jury was told that they did not need to be unanimous on what the second crime was. instead they were given three possibilities, not defined by the prosecution, to pick from. Each juror could have a different crime and still convict him of all 34 felonies.

This is not justice. The 6th amendment of the constitution says:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Trump was not informed of the nature of the accusation, this is not justice but authoritarianism. This has to be overturned, his rights were violated and anyone who is for justice should agree.

There were various other problems as well that will be overturned if justice can still be done in New York. Does anyone honestly believe that Biden would have been charged with these crimes if Bragg had the same evidence against him?

"It is never the law itself that is in the wrong; it is always some wicked interpreter of the law that has corrupted and abused it." ~ .Jeremy Bentham,
Well apparently Trump's lawyers disagree since they never brought it up or you have suddenly become a wizard after not even knowing what the charges were three days ago.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Trump was convicted of 34 felonies that have a max sentencing of 100+ years in jail with the defendant not knowing what crime he was convicted of. Think about that.

The conspiracy was not defined in the indictment

The conspiracy was not defined in the trial

The conspiracy was not defined by the jury after the verdict

The jury was told that they did not need to be unanimous on what the second crime was. instead they were given three possibilities, not defined by the prosecution, to pick from. Each juror could have a different crime and still convict him of all 34 felonies.

This is not justice. The 6th amendment of the constitution says:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Trump was not informed of the nature of the accusation, this is not justice but authoritarianism. This has to be overturned, his rights were violated and anyone who is for justice should agree.

There were various other problems as well that will be overturned if justice can still be done in New York. Does anyone honestly believe that Biden would have been charged with these crimes if Bragg had the same evidence against him?

"It is never the law itself that is in the wrong; it is always some wicked interpreter of the law that has corrupted and abused it." ~ .Jeremy Bentham,
First, Trump -- and his lawyers -- had precisely the same description of the nature of the alleged crime(s), and it is against that description that his lawyers were required to defend.

Second, it is a fact that to make a misdemeanor a felony, it must have been committed in an attempt (note, completion not required by the law) to break another law -- in this case, election law in New York. Every juror, to convict, must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump committed the misdemeanor in such an attempt, and it did not matter what the secondary attempted violation was -- just that there was one.

Third, because this is an unusual, likely very new, interpretation, it will certainly be appealed, and receive very careful scrutiny by appellate and superior courts, likely right up to SCOTUS.

Fourth, Bentham is wrong -- some laws are tautologically wrong. The right to whip a slave to near death, for example, whether legally protected, is simply wrong without need for further examination.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Trump was convicted of 34 felonies that have a max sentencing of 100+ years in jail with the defendant not knowing what crime he was convicted of. Think about that.

The conspiracy was not defined in the indictment

The conspiracy was not defined in the trial

The conspiracy was not defined by the jury after the verdict

The jury was told that they did not need to be unanimous on what the second crime was. instead they were given three possibilities, not defined by the prosecution, to pick from. Each juror could have a different crime and still convict him of all 34 felonies.

This is not justice. The 6th amendment of the constitution says:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Trump was not informed of the nature of the accusation, this is not justice but authoritarianism. This has to be overturned, his rights were violated and anyone who is for justice should agree.

There were various other problems as well that will be overturned if justice can still be done in New York. Does anyone honestly believe that Biden would have been charged with these crimes if Bragg had the same evidence against him?

"It is never the law itself that is in the wrong; it is always some wicked interpreter of the law that has corrupted and abused it." ~ .Jeremy Bentham,
That's why I think it's suspect. All convictions are across the board? Every one of them? Not a single not guilty anywhere to be found? That's really weird.

Has that ever happened anywhere else in other cases involving dozens of charges aside from despot countries where the conviction is completely and ultimately across the board?

I'll accept the appeal though once it concludes.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
Trump was convicted of 34 felonies that have a max sentencing of 100+ years in jail with the defendant not knowing what crime he was convicted of. Think about that.
He's either a liar or an idiot. Or both.
The conspiracy was not defined in the indictment
Yes it was. Cohen and pecker were both involved.
The conspiracy was not defined in the trial
Yes it was. I'm not sure how you missed it that a conspiracy is two or more people involved in commiting a crime. The defense did not ofer any explanation for the multitide of individuals invvolved in this coverup.
The conspiracy was not defined by the jury after the verdict
That wasn't their job.
The jury was told that they did not need to be unanimous on what the second crime was. instead they were given three possibilities, not defined by the prosecution, to pick from. Each juror could have a different crime and still convict him of all 34 felonies.
Irrelevant since they were unanimous on all counts.
This is not justice. The 6th amendment of the constitution says:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
Trump was informed of the crimes in the indictment. All 34 counts were described.
Trump was not informed of the nature of the accusation, this is not justice but authoritarianism. This has to be overturned, his rights were violated and anyone who is for justice should agree.
False, the indictments explained the nature of the crimes. Trump's defense has not agrred with your claim here as there has been no motions, before or during, and not after.
There were various other problems as well that will be overturned if justice can still be done in New York.
What's the evidence? I'm not going to take your word for it.
Does anyone honestly believe that Biden would have been charged with these crimes if Bragg had the same evidence against him?
Irrelevant. Trump commited crimes, he was caught, he was indicted, he had due process at trial, he was convicted by a unanimous decision on all counts.

Now a question for you, what right wing media outlet did you read all this nonsense? You get too many things wrong here for a pretty smart guy. But it seems you allowed yourself to be duped.
 

Clizby Wampuscat

Well-Known Member
First, Trump -- and his lawyers -- had precisely the same description of the nature of the alleged crime(s), and it is against that description that his lawyers were required to defend.
No they did not. The prosecution said he committed one crime to cover up one of these three crimes, they di dnot say which one.
Second, it is a fact that to make a misdemeanor a felony, it must have been committed in an attempt (note, completion not required by the law) to break another law -- in this case, election law in New York. Every juror, to convict, must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump committed the misdemeanor in such an attempt, and it did not matter what the secondary attempted violation was -- just that there was one.
So which one was it? The prosecution can't just say pick one.
Third, because this is an unusual, likely very new, interpretation, it will certainly be appealed, and receive very careful scrutiny by appellate and superior courts, likely right up to SCOTUS.
I agree.
Fourth, Bentham is wrong -- some laws are tautologically wrong. The right to whip a slave to near death, for example, whether legally protected, is simply wrong without need for further examination.
Ok
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Trump was convicted of 34 felonies that have a max sentencing of 100+
I forgot to mention, as these were considered minor felonies, the judge cannot order incarceration to run consecutively, only concurrently. Thus, the maximum possible jail time is 4 years. As Trump is a "first offender," (at least according to law) the judge would never apply the maximum sentence, and as we have seen Mershan go out of his way to treat Trump like (or better than) every other offender, it is almost a certainty that he would assign no jail time at all -- merely probation. In fact, since there is no minimum sentence, it could well be a discharge, either conditional or absolute.
 

Clizby Wampuscat

Well-Known Member
Yes it was. I'm not sure how you missed it that a conspiracy is two or more people involved in commiting a crime. The defense did not ofer any explanation for the multitide of individuals invvolved in this coverup.
What crime?
That wasn't their job.

Irrelevant since they were unanimous on all counts.
You don't know that. They were told they could differ on what the secondary crime was. That is not right.
Trump was informed of the crimes in the indictment. All 34 counts were described.
Show me in the indictment what crime Trump was trying to commit by falsifying business records. It isn't in there.
Irrelevant. Trump commited crimes, he was caught, he was indicted, he had due process at trial, he was convicted by a unanimous decision on all counts.
Again you don't know this because they never said they all agreed on the second crime. Only that they all thought there was another crime. Trump should know what that crime was and it should be unanimous. That is justice.
Now a question for you, what right wing media outlet did you read all this nonsense? You get too many things wrong here for a pretty smart guy. But it seems you allowed yourself to be duped.
Ok,
 

Clizby Wampuscat

Well-Known Member
I forgot to mention, as these were considered minor felonies, the judge cannot order incarceration to run consecutively, only concurrently. Thus, the maximum possible jail time is 4 years. As Trump is a "first offender," (at least according to law) the judge would never apply the maximum sentence, and as we have seen Mershan go out of his way to treat Trump like (or better than) every other offender, it is almost a certainty that he would assign no jail time at all -- merely probation. In fact, since there is no minimum sentence, it could well be a discharge, either conditional or absolute.
You are right on the concurrence. Normally a first time offender would not go to jail for a nonviolent crime. But I think this judge will sentence him to at last 30 days. We will see.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
What crime?
Enjoy.


BTW, do you have any legeal experience and knowledge about criminal procedure?
You don't know that. They were told they could differ on what the secondary crime was. That is not right.
Why isn't it right? Can you explain to me how you have superior knowledge of New York law that the prosecutor and judge?

But even if you had some basis for that issue it's irrelevant since all counts were decided guilty.
Show me in the indictment what crime Trump was trying to commit by falsifying business records. It isn't in there.
It was the fraud of paying off Daniels for her silence (which isn't a crime) through Cohen, and then paying back Cohen under FALSE statements of legal services, and then adding more money to the reibursement to cover the taxes on the $130,000, which is fraud. They also had to pay Cohen for the taxes on the extra money that was to cover the taxes, so it ended up costing Trump about $480,000 just to pay back the $130,000. It wasn't income, but it was reported on tax forms as being income. That's fraud that Trump was involved with, and he signed all those checks. And then this meant violations of election finance laws. Do you need me to do your homework for you on this as well? I'm curious why you are posting views but haven't researched the facts.

All this was motivated because Trump was running for president and didn't want the public to know about his cheating on his wife with a porn star. The witnesses confirmed that Trump was aware of all elements of the scheme. The jury was convinced.
Again you don't know this because they never said they all agreed on the second crime.
The "second" crime was any of those included in the indictment. The jury was instructed on these rules. They decided Trump was guilty on all counts. So this "second" crime issue is irrelevant.
Only that they all thought there was another crime.
All crmes were detailed as counts in the indictment. There were 34 counts, and that means 34 crimes. Are you not aware of this?
Trump should know what that crime was and it should be unanimous. That is justice.
Then he should have stayed awake during the trial, and had his lawyers explain it to him. It was all laid out by the prosecution, and the jury was unanimous that all were done by Trump intentionally. Being ignorant of the law is no excuse to get away with the crimes. Remember, Trump has had many attorneys in his orbit that have been indicted and/or had their law licenses revoked. Rudy Guliani, John Eastman, Jenna Ellis, Jeffery Clark, Kenneth Cheseboro, Sydney powell, and Cohen himself. His orbit is one of corruption, fraud, and destruction of those who help him. Trump is not exempt from justice. And there are more fools lined up to be the next set of corrupt and fallen characters in MAGA politics. They all hope that Trump wins, and uses his power to subvert the law so they can get a way with crimes this time.
 

Copernicus

Industrial Strength Linguist
Republicans have a House committee investigating the weaponization of government by Democrats. They have complained bitterly about partisan Democratic influence in government institutions. All of these criminal trials appear to them to be examples of that weaponization. Keep that in mind when you consider that Speaker Johnson has publicly called on the Republican-dominated Supreme Court to intervene and overturn the criminal conviction of their presumptive nominee for 2024 election.

Johnson urges Supreme Court to "step in" on Trump verdict


Because Democrats are using government institutions for partisan political purposes. :oops:
 

Pogo

Well-Known Member
That's why I think it's suspect. All convictions are across the board? Every one of them? Not a single not guilty anywhere to be found? That's really weird.

Has that ever happened anywhere else in other cases involving dozens of charges aside from despot countries where the conviction is completely and ultimately across the board?

I'll accept the appeal though once it concludes.
Accept the verdict and allow for the slim possibility that Trump can actually find an error that might cause some change in the verdict. Considering the speed with which the guilty verdicts were returned, the chances of a full reversal are slim to zilch.
The trial is over, Trump was convicted, to wait for Trump to file all the frivolous appeals that he normally does till you accept the verdict is perverse and snacks of denial.
 

Spice

StewardshipPeaceIntergityCommunityEquality
Well apparently Trump's lawyers disagree since they never brought it up or you have suddenly become a wizard after not even knowing what the charges were three days ago.
And it's my understanding from what I heard last night, any points for appeal have to have been brought up in the original trial and denied.
 

Pogo

Well-Known Member
And it's my understanding from what I heard last night, any points for appeal have to have been brought up in the original trial and denied.
One would hope so, but I'm sure Trump will find some way around it.
Got a link or reference though.
 

Spice

StewardshipPeaceIntergityCommunityEquality
And how do you supposedly know that? Each charge was presented, but then maybe Trump slept and farted through those parts.
And what I heard was a maximum of 4 years and ir course minimum probation. But I never heard confirmation if that was 4 years per verdict or not.
 

Pogo

Well-Known Member
Republicans have a House committee investigating the weaponization of government by Democrats. They have complained bitterly about partisan Democratic influence in government institutions. All of these criminal trials appear to them to be examples of that weaponization. Keep that in mind when you consider that Speaker Johnson has publicly called on the Republican-dominated Supreme Court to intervene and overturn the criminal conviction of their presumptive nominee for 2024 election.

Johnson urges Supreme Court to "step in" on Trump verdict


Because Democrats are using government institutions for partisan political purposes. :oops:
Can we send all these people back to 9th grade civics class for remediation?
Or has postmodernism just reached Kafkaesque proportions and time to end it all.
 
Top