Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Adam H. Kerman" Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: GUILTY. All 34 counts. Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 16:00:55 -0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 97 Message-ID: References: Injection-Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2024 18:00:56 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c31329cf03b7679a65d97ce946c3fe4f"; logging-data="527707"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/CpsfpNurbpddcT3eD5Mj6PpFd/hys5kk=" Cancel-Lock: sha1:HOjSaHkQ7nmnTHzd+B35Mh+f2zk= X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010) Bytes: 5404 Dimensional Traveler wrote: >On 6/3/2024 7:31 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote: >>Adam H. Kerman wrote: >>>BTR1701 wrote: >>>>May 31, 2024 at 7:43:16 PM PDT, Adam H. Kerman wrote: >>>>>shawn wrote: >>>>>>Sat, 1 Jun 2024 10:54:32 +1200, Your Name wrote: >>>>>>>On 2024-05-31 10:46:00 +0000, FPP said: >>>>>>>>On 5/31/24 4:48 AM, trotsky wrote: >>>>>>>>>On 5/30/24 4:17 PM, FPP wrote: >>>>>>>>>>GUILTY. All 34 counts. >>>>>>>>>I called it. Let the whining begin! >>>>>>>>Yup... I was shooting for Friday. Really surprised, since a half hour >>>>>>>>before, the judge was shutting it down for the day. >>>>>>>Trump the Chump's whining startedd immediately and his braindead >>>>>>>supports declared "war" not long after. >>>>>>>Not that this decision means anything in reality. The whole mess will >>>>>>>drag on for years longer yet with numerous appeals, counter-appeals, >>>>>>>etc. Trump the Chump and most of the witnesses will be dead of old age >>>>>>>before it ends, and even then you'll probably have their kids trying to >>>>>>>clear their names one way or another. >>>>>>Not that long but yes, it will likely go on for a couple of years. >>>>>>There are two level of appeals at the NY state level and then Trump >>>>>>can try to jump to the US Supreme Court if both levels of appeal fail >>>>>>to overturn the verdict. >>>>>There's no direct appeal from state court to federal court. They have to >>>>>find a federal issue to dispute. >>>>There is a federal issue. The predicate crime that the state used to >>>>bootstrap the state charges despite it being beyond the statute of >>>>limitations was a federal crime, and one that both the DOJ and the FEC >>>>had already looked at and determined there was no violation. So the >>>>question of whether the entire basis of the state's case was valid is >>>>a federal question. >>>I am certainly not going to agree that the feds ever made a finding of no >>>violation. Prosecutors never say that out loud, anyway, when there are no >>>charges preferred against the target of the investigation. The FEC isn't >>>doing its job if every entity those funds passed through didn't receive >>>a letter in which they found campaign disclosure violations. Fines should >>>have been issued. >>>Do we know why prosecution was limited to Michael Cohen? >>>Say, was Stormy Daniels herself obligated to make disclosure? >>>I don't see how the issue is moot because the underlying crime can no >>>longer be charged. >>>Trump's complaints that Biden is behind the conspiracy are equal >>>protection but I doubt there's an actual equal protection argument to >>>make. Mark Levin's tweet, that I referenced elsewhere, had several due >>>process arguments to make. >>>But the issue of the state law itself cannot be contested in federal >>>court. >>Ok. The point BTR1701 made here has bothered me for days. I didn't track >>down the language of the criminal statute Trump was charged under, but I >>found descriptions of what the charges were. I'll assume it's consistent >>with the law, else Trump would have gotten the charges thrown out. >> In New York, in order for the charge of falsifying business >> records to be bumped up to a felony, one must commit the crime >> of falsifying business records when the "intent to defraud >> includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal >> the commission thereof." >>https://www.factcheck.org/2023/04/whats-in-trumps-indictment/ >>To provide the case, the state doesn't prove that there was a violation >>of the underlying law. The state proves intent to commit another crime, >>or to aid or conceal the commission thereof. >>The state must prove intent to commit the crime without, in fact, >>proving that the underlying crime was committed? >>Can one intend to commit a crime be proven without the crime having been >>committed? The intent is the criminal act for the purpose of the >>criminal charge of fraud based on proving intent in the underlying >>crime? >>I don't get it. >Possession of tools to commit burglary. I'm going to need a little more here to understand what the state must prove. Do the police need to find evidence of what property was about to be burgled? Otherwise I don't see how intent to commit the crime of burglary could be proved.