GUILTY NY - Ex-President Donald Trump, charged with 34 criminal counts of falsifying business records, Apr 2023, Trial 25 Mar 2024 #3

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's obvious to me that convicted liar Michael Cohen testimony is worthless because he hates President Trump and is seeking revenge. JMO.

The credibility of a convicted liar could determine Trump’s fate
Yet his testimony is far from worthless and was valuable for the state having witnesses and evidence to corroborate it, especially David Peckers and Dylan Howards.

Cohen isn't on trial, Trump is and had Cohen not been a greedy,lying pit-bull threatening bully Trump would have fired him years ago.
Trump always wanted a lawyer to fill the disgraced Roy Cohn's shoes and Cohen did to an extent.
Trump's 2 lawyers who he was closest to, Cohn and Cohen were both disbarred.
What are those odds? lol
 
You can disagree with me, but multiple lawyers have mentioned the issues with the prosecution not calling Weisselberg or Schiller.

Federal cases in NY get the written instructions in NY, state cases do not. As we can see, it's already a problem since the judge will meet with the jurors in the morning to review instructions. See this link: https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/29/politics/takeaways-trump-jury-deliberations/index.html#

I expect a Federal-level appeal if there is a conviction, perhaps we will see a change in NY law over jury instructions from this very case.
Thanks for the correction.
I thought both state and federal jurors couldn't take jury instructions into deliberation.
 
Blanche repeatedly reminded jurors of Cohen's past lies, including his 2018 guilty plea for lying to Congress. And the defense played for jurors clips of Cohen’s podcast in which the now-disbarred attorney said seeing the former president booked on criminal charges “fills me with delight.”

The case against Trump is built around testimony from “a witness that outright hates the defendant, wants him in jail, is actively making money off that hatred,” Blanche said.
The jurors should note Cohen's previous cases of lying under oath along with his admitted hatred of Donald Trump and reject his testimony. JMO.

 
Because Trump's team could directly appeal to the SCOTUS. It is an election year, similar to the Bush v Gore case that was quickly taken up by them.
What's the connection between hanging chads after an election and a convicted felon running for president?
 
IANAL but from what I've casually seen there are numerous legal problems with this case: several important witnesses not being called (Weisselberg, Schiller), limiting what one witness (Smith) could say about Federal election laws, the oral jury instructions, the jury not being provided written instructions, and indecisions on defense motions. If there is a conviction, I expect a speedy appeal all the way to the SCOTUS. It only takes 4 justices to take the case on an emergency basis.
And the reason that critical testimony was not allowed is because NDAs cannot be charged as campaign expenses.
 
It's a moot point even though Blanche put all his eggs in the Cohen/Stormy basket.
The jury will decide on the enormous amount of evidence presented by the state.
Most of it corroborates Cohen's testimony among other witnesse's testimonies.
How is any witness testimony "moot"?
 
“If you find that any witness has intentionally testified falsely,” Merchan told the jurors, “you may disregard that witness’s entire testimony.”
Below are some of the jury instructions that the jury should use to disregard Cohen's testimony. JMO.


  • Whether the witness’s background, training, education or experience affected his or her believability
  • If a witness had conscious bias, hostility or some other attitude that affected their testimony
  • If he or she displayed unconscious bias
  • Whether a witness had or did not have motive to lie
  • Whether a witness hopes for or expects to receive a benefit from testifying
  • Whether a witness has any interest in the outcome of the case
  • Whether a witness has been convicted of a crime or engaged in criminal conduct
 

Then we have the problem with Cohen's testimony where he was uncertain about what really took place and then tried to say two subjects were discussed with two different people in a mere 96 seconds. JMO.

“You had enough time in that one minute and 36 seconds to update Mr. Schiller about all the problems you were having with this harassing phone call and also update President Trump on the status of the Stormy Daniels situation?” Blanche screeched.

“I believe I was telling the truth,” the salt-and-pepper-haired Cohen, 57, wearing a black suit and honey mustard yellow tie, calmly replied.
 
The issue arose after Trump lawyers objected to a plan by prosecutors to show jurors a severance agreement that calls for Weisselberg to receive $750,000 over the rest of this year. “What we are trying to do is to explain from our perspective why he’s not here,” prosecutor Christopher Conroy said, suggesting that the money is discouraging Weisselberg from testifying.

More at link: https://www.politico.com/live-updat...-criminal-trial/weisselberg-in-court-00157368
 

Then we have the problem with Cohen's testimony where he was uncertain about what really took place and then tried to say two subjects were discussed with two different people in a mere 96 seconds. JMO.
He can’t keep track of his own lies. I guess that’s what happens when you’re a compulsive liar.
 
Serious question, are the judge's jury instructions given to the jury in writing during their deliberation so they have clear understanding of what they are charged with?
 
Serious question, are the judge's jury instructions given to the jury in writing during their deliberation so they have clear understanding of what they are charged with?

No. My understanding that this is NY law, that jurors do not receive written instructions.

I don't have a link but I will see if I can find one.
 
Just heard on ABC radio. In Australia.

A US joumalist said that the jurors have access to a laptop in the jury room.
On this laptop they can go over evidence in the case .

I presume the laptop doesn't have internet access.
Or is court inhouse with only this trial related stuff.

The journalist was Jessica Scheider who is a CNN Justice Correspondent.
 
Another serious question. Has anyone heard of a judge having the defense give their closing before the prosecution? I haven't and find this puzzling.

The order varies by state.

I know here in California the prosecution goes first, then the defense, then the prosecution, the logic being that the prosecution has the burden of proof so gets every opportunity to do that.

I think it is the same in federal court, IIRC from my time on a federal criminal jury.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
89
Guests online
598
Total visitors
687

Forum statistics

Threads
596,479
Messages
18,048,397
Members
230,011
Latest member
Ms.Priss74
Back
Top