Nothing in that link shows that Trump had to be convicted of another crime before he could be convicted of falsification of records. Where is your evidence to support that claim? Can you back it up with an actual court ruling? I have presented you with appeals court rulings that show you are wrong. Give me one appeals ruling requiring what you say is required.
Trump’s lawyers ask judge to halt Friday’s hush money case sentencing while they appeal to block it
- Thread starter Magats_Love_NHB
- Start date
You might want to actually read the entire piece from Lawfare you linked to. It lays out how the jury doesn't all have to agree on which underlying crime makes the falsification of records a felony. It also points out that intent is enough for the underlying crime. I responded just with your quote before I went and read it. It actually supports most of my argument and disputes most of yours. It discusses the 3 underlying crimes when you claim there was only one.The alleged cover-up is Bragg's reasoning for charging Trump with 34 felonies, rather than misdemeanors. In order to convict, Bragg will need to prove Trump tried to conceal crimes that he has not been charged with — and that are not actually named in the indictment.
- One of those potential crimes — violating federal campaign finance laws — is not in Bragg's power to prosecute as a district attorney.
- The unusual legal strategy could pose a significant challenge — and may backfire in spectacular fashion if Trump is acquitted or the judge dismisses the case before it's even brought to trial.
Because the New York falsifying business records crime is ordinarily a misdemeanor offense with a two-year statute of limitations period, to avoid the statute of limitations, the government needed to elevate the charges to felony offenses by asserting that Trump had the “intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.” To do so, it relied at trial, though not in its indictment, on a separate misdemeanor criminal charge that appears to have never been used similarly: Section 17-152 of the New York Election Law. That law makes it unlawful to conspire to promote a candidate’s election by “unlawful means.”
What Must Prosecutors Prove in Trump’s NY Trial?
Some in-the-weeds questions on which the New York Trump trial depends.www.lawfaremedia.org
Without an enumerated underlying felony the case falls apart. Merchan cannot simply let the jury decide that Trump committed some unenumerated felony because the prosecution says so without evidence of a prior trial and conviction. This was the problem for Bragg all along. Charging the case as a misdemeanor put it out of the statute of limitations. Thus, Bragg was forced to bring it as felony charges but didn't have the necessary prerequisite underlying felony to use for that. So, he brought on the basis of nothing more than probable cause, something never done with that law before. Merchan went along with that and even stopped any attempts by the defense to bring this up in front of the jury.
From your link
As an initial matter, the text of Section 175.10 suggests that what’s required is proof of intent, rather than of the object crime. The statute reads:
[snip]
As in the Trump case, in Thompson, the Manhattan district attorney charged § 175.10 without charging the underlying object offense. Here, the appeals court found that the district attorney was not required to prove that the object offense had been committed. “
[snip]
Do all the jurors have to agree on which option among the three grouped in box B? An overview of the relevant law suggests that no, the jury does not need to be unanimous as to the object offense.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
^^^Trump's lawyers are just collecting fuel to use in the appeal. The harder Merchan pushes this, the more likely the appeals court will toss the entire case out, which they appear to have every inclination of doing at this point.
Judges appear receptive to Trump arguments in civil fraud case appeal, AG repeatedly cut off
The lawyer speaking for the attorney general's office was cut off before she could even get her first sentence out – by a judge who essentially ridiculed the state's position.lawandcrime.com
Trump has committed so many different crimes even Terry is confused as to which cases are which.
