Pending indictment against Trump in Georgia

213,470 Views | 2428 Replies | Last: 2 days ago by TXAggie2011
fka ftc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Truth.
fka ftc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Elton John is filled with more toxic masculinity than most republicans, particularly the concerned ones and those afflicted with permanent Trump related illnesses.
Mondemonium
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Im Gipper
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Im Gipper said:

Is Cheeseboro pushing for a trial by year's end?



Bet Fani didn't see that coming!
Yes, yes he is.






I'm Gipper
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Fine. She can try him separately then.

There was no way she would be able to try all 19 in one trial anyway. That was all BS and in contravention of the defendants' due process rights.

People forget but the state has zero right to what they consider a "fair trial." Due process applies to the defendants, not the prosecution.
Im Gipper
How long do you want to ignore this user?
She can try them separately, but you know that is not the path she wants!

Smart play by the Cheseboro team.

I'm Gipper
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Im Gipper said:

She can try them separately, but you know that is not the path she wants!

Smart play by the Cheseboro team.
Yeah, well it was just dumb of her to even say that knowing the likelihood of it happening was zero.
VegasAg86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:

Fine. She can try him separately then.

There was no way she would be able to try all 19 in one trial anyway. That was all BS and in contravention of the defendants' due process rights.

People forget but the state has zero right to what they consider a "fair trial." Due process applies to the defendants, not the prosecution.
What happens if all 19 make the same request, plus separate trials? I think the reactions would certainly provide some entertainment.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
VegasAg86 said:

aggiehawg said:

Fine. She can try him separately then.

There was no way she would be able to try all 19 in one trial anyway. That was all BS and in contravention of the defendants' due process rights.

People forget but the state has zero right to what they consider a "fair trial." Due process applies to the defendants, not the prosecution.
What happens if all 19 make the same request, plus separate trials? I think the reactions would certainly provide some entertainment.
Different defendants will have different defense strategies. But the speedy trial act use can both giveth and taketh away. Exhibit A was the Alex Murdaugh murder trial.
Im Gipper
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

What happens if all 19 make the same request, plus separate trials?
I don't know if this particular Georgia statute on a speedy trial has different provision, or what the law in Georgia is on joint trials for separate cases, but in Texas and Federal Courts, there is no right to a separate trial. The standard in Federal cases is : "if there is a serious risk that a joint trial would compromise a specific trial right of one of the defendants, or prevent the jury from making a reliable judgment about guilt or innocence"

Zafiro v US, 506 US 534 (1993)

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-6824.ZO.html


Quote:

I think the reactions would certainly provide some entertainment.
Absolutely! And I really hope we get to see it!

I'm Gipper
VegasAg86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Im Gipper said:

Quote:

What happens if all 19 make the same request, plus separate trials?
I don't know if this particular Georgia statute on a speedy trial has different provision, or what the law in Georgia is on joint trials for separate cases, but in Texas and Federal Courts, there is no right to a separate trial. The standard in Federal cases is : "if there is a serious risk that a joint trial would compromise a specific trial right of one of the defendants, or prevent the jury from making a reliable judgment about guilt or innocence"

Zafiro v US, 506 US 534 (1993)

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-6824.ZO.html


Quote:

I think the reactions would certainly provide some entertainment.
Absolutely! And I really hope we get to see it!
I'm with you.

TXAggie2011
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I believe Georgia law on severing a trial is:

Quote:

In exercising the court's discretion on a motion to sever, the trial court must consider three factors: (1) whether the number of defendants creates confusion as to the law and evidence to be applied to each; (2) whether a danger exists that evidence admissible against one defendant might be considered against the other notwithstanding instructions to the contrary; and (3) whether the defenses are antagonistic to each other or each other's rights. Robinson v. State, 259 Ga. App. 555, 578 S.E.2d 214 (2003).


At the federal level, the starting point is a preference to keep defendants together in one trial absent a compelling reason to split them up. I don't know if Georgia law formally starts there or not, but I imagine it probably does in practical terms, at least.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Like I said before, fine, try Chesebro alone.

Quote:

A Georgia judge on Thursday scheduled the first trial for a co-defendant of former President Donald Trump for criminally interfering in the state's 2020 election to begin on Oct. 23.

The co-defendant, Kenneth Chesebro, on Wednesday had filed a demand for a speedy trial in the case in Atlanta.

Earlier Thursday, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, responded to that request by asking a a judge to set Oct. 23 as the trial date for Trump, Chesebro, and the other 17 defendants.

But Chesebro, who is an attorney, is the only one of Trump's co-defendants who will stand trial starting that day under the new order issued Thursday by Judge Scott McAfee in Fulton County Superior Court.
McAfee's order lays out an extremely fast timeline for the Chesebro's case before trial.
Quote:

When Willis asked McAfee to set Oct. 23 as the trial date for all defendants, Trump's lawyer quickly replied in court opposing that request. Trump's attorney also said he would seek to sever his case from that of Chesebro.

McAfee's order setting Chesebro's trial was issued as Trump was en route to an Atlanta jail to be booked in the case.

The judge set Chesebro's arraignment for Sept. 9, with the exchange of evidence by prosecutors and his lawyers to be completed by Sept. 20.
LINK
Hungry Ojos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
What is the significance of all of this?
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Hungry Ojos said:

What is the significance of all of this?
Not much really. Other than some other posters being flat ass wrong, that is.

Any indictment that long and involving that many defendants has a very small chance of all of them being tried together, mostly for due process reasons and what the prosecution wants be damned.

Chesebro has a right to a speedy trial, if he wants it, boom period, the end. If Willis doesn't like that, dismiss the charges against him.
Im Gipper
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Who was flat ass wrong? Don't see anyone making any analysis on Georgia law here.


I'm Gipper
txags92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:

Hungry Ojos said:

What is the significance of all of this?
Not much really. Other than some other posters being flat ass wrong, that is.

Any indictment that long and involving that many defendants has a very small chance of all of them being tried together, mostly for due process reasons and what the prosecution wants be damned.

Chesebro has a right to a speedy trial, if he wants it, boom period, the end. If Willis doesn't like that, dismiss the charges against him.
Is he allowed to share any discovery he gets for his early trial with lawyers for the other defendants?
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Unless under court order not to, yes. But if the trial is televised anyway not sure such an order would make much sense. Co-defendants' team will just record and watch later to see which exhbits are presented and how they are described during laying the foundation for admissibility.

My spidey senses tell me Willis will dismiss the charges against him, right after the expiration date for filing for a right to speedy trial so no one else sees the efficacy and does the same. IIRC, within 30 days of the filing of the indictment. Might be wrong about that under GA law but I think that's the applicable rule.
GeorgiAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
My associate has a case with Ray Smith right now.

aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Im Gipper said:

Who was flat ass wrong? Don't see anyone making any analysis on Georgia law here.


That one defendant cannot gain a severance of trial by asserting their constitutional right to a speedy trial. They can.

Getting a severance after waiving the right to a speedy trial is a different inquiry because no fundamental due process rights are in play.
Im Gipper
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

That one defendant cannot gain a severance of trial by asserting their constitutional right to a speedy trial. They can.


No one said they couldn't.

As of now, constitutional right to speedy trial isn't even an issue. It's the Georgia statute at play.

I'm Gipper
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

No one said they couldn't.

As of now, constitutional right to speedy trial isn't even an issue. It's the Georgia statute at play.
Citing and linking to the GA severability statute indicated differently to me.

And since when does the right to a speedy trial depend on which state one is in? Did you misspeak there?
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Im Gipper
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aggiehawg said:

Quote:

No one said they couldn't.

As of now, constitutional right to speedy trial isn't even an issue. It's the Georgia statute at play.
Citing and linking to the GA severability statute indicated differently to me.

And since when does the right to a speedy trial depend on which state one is in? Did you misspeak there?


Not sure what you are talking about.

Under Georgia statutory law Chesboro has a right to a trial before the end of two grand jury terms. Which is apparently by the end of this calendar year.

The US Constitution right to speedy trial under Sixth Amendment does not guarantee a trial that quickly.

State can give more protection than US Constitution. That's what it happening here.

I'm Gipper
JFABNRGR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Hungry Ojos said:

will25u said:





Oooooooohhhhhhhhhh, an "inquiry" you say?????? That'll show em!

Republicans are feckless, worthless cowards. How can they sit back and watch the left indict and arrest political opponents and do nothing other than send mean letters (that they trip over themselves to post on social media like they're taking action). The entire debate last night should have centered around lawfare and unequal application of justice, Biden's ACTUAL crimes, etc., yet instead, Brett asks a question about UFO's. I don't care what you think about Trump or his team, but this is absolutely unacceptable and I can't see myself lifting a finger to help any of these losers get elected, when they refuse to lift a finger to right this egregious wrong.


100% spot on comment I am just surprised you spent the effort watching the debate.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Im Gipper said:

aggiehawg said:

Quote:

No one said they couldn't.

As of now, constitutional right to speedy trial isn't even an issue. It's the Georgia statute at play.
Citing and linking to the GA severability statute indicated differently to me.

And since when does the right to a speedy trial depend on which state one is in? Did you misspeak there?


Not sure what you are talking about.

Under Georgia statutory law Chesboro has a right to a trial before the end of two grand jury terms. Which is apparently by the end of this calendar year.

The US Constitution right to speedy trial under Sixth Amendment does not guarantee a trial that quickly.

State can give more protection than US Constitution. That's what it happening here.
Oh. I misunderstood what you said then. My bad.
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AGHouston11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Hungry Ojos said:

will25u said:





Oooooooohhhhhhhhhh, an "inquiry" you say?????? That'll show em!

Republicans are feckless, worthless cowards. How can they sit back and watch the left indict and arrest political opponents and do nothing other than send mean letters (that they trip over themselves to post on social media like they're taking action). The entire debate last night should have centered around lawfare and unequal application of justice, Biden's ACTUAL crimes, etc., yet instead, Brett asks a question about UFO's. I don't care what you think about Trump or his team, but this is absolutely unacceptable and I can't see myself lifting a finger to help any of these losers get elected, when they refuse to lift a finger to right this egregious wrong.


Exactly

Most of the things happening are the Republicans fault!
Their hate for Trump has no limits.



oh no
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TexasAggie73
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I don't understand something. Many on here do not want Trump to be the R nomination as they believe it would lead to another D win, but are all upset with all the court proceeding. Wouldn't the easiest path for Trump to be out of the running , that he is leading far and away, is to have him disqualified?
Proc92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I don't like one party telling the other half of the country who they choose to represent them.
aggiejayrod
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TexasAggie73 said:

I don't understand something. Many on here do not want Trump to be the R nomination as they believe it would lead to another D win, but are all upset with all the court proceeding. Wouldn't the easiest path for Trump to be out of the running , that he is leading far and away, is to have him disqualified?


Yeah….some of us don't like petty tyrants trying to imprison their political rivals. Even if we don't want Trump to be the nominee. Be better
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TexasAggie73 said:

I don't understand something. Many on here do not want Trump to be the R nomination as they believe it would lead to another D win, but are all upset with all the court proceeding. Wouldn't the easiest path for Trump to be out of the running , that he is leading far and away, is to have him disqualified?
Gee, I don't know, maybe because that is illegal and unconstitutional?
TexasAggie73
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Maybe trust in the court system and the appeal process. This is not like a Russian court. Some here get over dramatic about all this. Again, why not let the court do its work. If the court has the proof that laws were broken, then let them do their work. Let it play out and see what the repeal process goes. If I was DeSantis at this point, it might be my only hope.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.