Bragg Fails to Cite UNDERLYING FELONY that is the Entire Basis of His Case
- Thread starter Grokmaster
- Start date
QP!
Verified User
I am learning a lot about him from you guys who know his history, but it all only confirms what was apparent and obvious.
He admitted to being a slum lord lawyer and in fact that area of law is often the last refuge of the failed lawyers whose only real value is that they can execute documents, the paralegals cannot for court filings.
Slumlord lawyers deal 99% of the time with defendants who do not show up to court for evictions or judgements on missed payments. It is a filing exercise with all doc's generally drawn up by paralegals and signed by the lawyer. the lawyer is often the least knowledge in that room.
Geeko Sportivo
Verified User
Did someone say something? I totally ignore this ignoramus!
I hope you were looking into a mirror when you said that, you laughably ignorant dotard.
It appears that you know nothing about this case and get your information from MSNBC which makes you a moron on steroids.
Kill yourself. No one will care. No one will notice. One less piece of low IQ human filth on the planet has to be a good thing.
Really? Did MSNBC tell you that? How were they concealing election information AFTER the election dipstick.
Another low information clueless wonder dunce who knows nothing about the case bloviating ignorantly.
Clueless dotard thinks indictments are the same as evidence. Biden voters are the dumbest ignoramuses on the planet. Which is why they would vote for a corrupt, lying fool like Biden.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
I don't watch TV news. Try reading the indictment document.Really? Did MSNBC tell you that? How were they concealing election information AFTER the election dipstick.
The events in question were after the election.
Please POST the indictment wording that says what you are making up.
Into the Night
Verified User
Argument of the Stone fallacy. Bulverism fallacy. Your cowardice is already noted, Lizard.
Into the Night
Verified User
No crime listed. Try again.
Each of the indictments is a crime.
No, an indictment is an accusation.
No crime has been proven. The records are misdemeanors, far in excess of the statute of limitations, unless Bragg can tie them to the Big, Secret Underlying Crime, which he has not.
And the prosecution has RESTED ITS CASE.
"
When Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg first brought charges against Donald Trump in March 2023, the legal theory behind the indictment remained remarkably unclear. Bragg had charged Trump under New York Penal Law § 175.10, falsifying business records in the first degree. The falsification of business records alone is a misdemeanor under § 175.05—but Bragg had boosted the charge to a felony by alleging that Trump fudged the records with the “intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof.” But what other crime? The indictment didn’t say.
Now, a year later, with the trial finally underway, Bragg’s legal theory has come into focus—if you know where to look. The charges against Trump still have an oddly inchoate quality, thanks to Bragg’s decision to charge § 175.10 without also charging alongside it the offense that elevated the alleged business records violation to a felony.
Charting the Legal Theory Behind People v. Trump
The mechanics of the case as District Attorney Alvin Bragg is prosecuting it.
www.lawfaremedia.org
Last edited:
The above post says it all.
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
Don't forget he also used "charge stacking."
harvardlawreview.org
mcaleerlaw.net
That is, Bragg charged 34 felonies for the same thing against the same supposed underlying crime. That is, there is one underlying crime and supposedly Trump on 34 occasions made some bookkeeping entry that could be charged. Normally, this would be one crime for the underlying crime, not 34 separate charges.
It's like being caught felony speeding and given 34 counts, one for each mile you sped.
Stacked: Where Criminal Charge Stacking Happens — And Where it Doesn't - Harvard Law Review
Introduction When prosecutors approached a first-time drug offender who had sold a little over half a kilogram of marijuana, they offered him a deal:...
harvardlawreview.org
Understanding Stacking Charges in Criminal Prosecution-
Exploring the dynamics of stacking charges in criminal law: Find out how prosecutors leverage multiple charges to pursue harsher penalties.
mcaleerlaw.net
That is, Bragg charged 34 felonies for the same thing against the same supposed underlying crime. That is, there is one underlying crime and supposedly Trump on 34 occasions made some bookkeeping entry that could be charged. Normally, this would be one crime for the underlying crime, not 34 separate charges.
It's like being caught felony speeding and given 34 counts, one for each mile you sped.
To put it mildly.Don't forget he also used "charge stacking."
Stacked: Where Criminal Charge Stacking Happens — And Where it Doesn't - Harvard Law Review
Introduction When prosecutors approached a first-time drug offender who had sold a little over half a kilogram of marijuana, they offered him a deal:...
Understanding Stacking Charges in Criminal Prosecution-
Exploring the dynamics of stacking charges in criminal law: Find out how prosecutors leverage multiple charges to pursue harsher penalties.
That is, Bragg charged 34 felonies for the same thing against the same supposed underlying crime. That is, there is one underlying crime and supposedly Trump on 34 occasions made some bookkeeping entry that could be charged. Normally, this would be one crime for the underlying crime, not 34 separate charges.
It's like being caught felony speeding and given 34 counts, one for each mile you sped.