AggieUSMC said:

---

FriscoKid said:

---

He's going to be found guilty on all counts. Russia courts work the same way.

---

You may be right but I'm not quite that pessimistic. All it takes is one fair-minded juror to hold out.

If they come to a quick verdict, I'm worried. If this takes several days, I think a hung jury or an acquittal is more likely.

---

I think there could be one or two fair minded jurors……my concern is they may vote guilty out of self preservation

The identity of the holdouts will be known and they will be doxxed

Could they hold up to that type of pressure?

FriscoKid said:

---

NDA's are not illegal

---

Kinda where I keep getting stuck. NDA's are used all the time and it isn't uncommon for someone to be paid $$ in return for keeping confidential information private. Not sure how the public was somehow harmed, or owed, this information.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Judge Juan Merchan is explaining that intent to defraud means conscious objective or purpose.
He says a question naturally arises with how to determine intent.

Quote:

---

"To make that determination in this case, you must decide whether the required intent can be inferred beyond a reasonable doubt from the proven facts," he says.

---

Merchan is defining several terms relevant to the falsifying business records charge. Intent to defraud "is when his or her conscious objective or purpose is to do so." Intent does not require premeditation, he says.
A general intent to defraud any person or entity is suffice and it can extend beyond economic concerns.

---

---

Isnt the judge prosecuting Trump again in his instructions?

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Judge Juan Merchan explains that the jury must determine whether the Trump conspired to promote a person to or prevent a person from public office by unlawful means.
They must be unanimous on that fact but not on the unlawful means.
Merchan explains the prosecution has three theories of those unlawful means:

• Violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act, otherwise known as FECA
• Falsification of other business records
• Violations of tax laws

---

There is automatic reversible error, right there.

---

How so?

Quote:

---

Judge Juan Merchan tells the jury it is unlawful for an individual to willfully make a contribution to any candidate running for office, including the presidency, exceeding certain limits which in the relevant years was $2,700.
Merchan says that if a payment would have been made even in the absence of a candidacy, then the payment should not be treated as a contribution.
He also outlines how things like editorials and other media activity is not considered a political contribution, "so long as such activity is a normal, legitimate press function."

---

Reversible error again.

FECA was never directly addressed by the prosecution. Major problem still.

What was the FECA violation? (and again, if the Feds did not bring charges can there really be a determination on a violation?)

I don't see how paying cohens invoices is fraud

Was a specific tax law violation ever cited?

AggieUSMC said:

---

FriscoKid said:

---

He's going to be found guilty on all counts. Russia courts work the same way.

---

You may be right but I'm not quite that pessimistic. All it takes is one fair-minded juror to hold out.

If they come to a quick verdict, I'm worried. If this takes several days, I think a hung jury or an acquittal is more likely.

---

You are so naive. This trial is the criminal version of the E Jean Carroll & Trump business fraud civil trials - Manhattan jurisdiction, corrupt judges, corrupt prosecutors, corrupt juries (in the case of this & Carroll), obscure/manipulated statutes & laws not used against anyone not named Trump, and zero credible evidence against Trump but credible evidence of no wrongdoing.

But none of that matters. All three trials nothing but Kabuki theater with predetermined outcomes.

Quote:

---

Judge Juan Merchan describes what the jury must find in count one of the charges against Donald Trump.
The judge said the people must prove each of the following two things:
On or about February 14, 2017, the defendant personally or by acting in concert with another person or persons "made or caused the false entries" in the books of a business enterprise. It is specific to the invoice of Michael Cohen, "Marked as record of Donald J. Trump revocable trust and kept or maintained by Trump Organization."
And that " the defendant did so with the intent to defraud" which Merchan said includes the intent to commit another crime or to aide or conceal the commission of another crime.

---

Quote:

---

Judge Juan Merchan explains the tax law violations and says it's unlawful for a person to willfully produce a tax statement or other document that's materially false.
Such conduct is unlawful even if it does not result in underpayment of taxes, he notes.
Regarding the unlawful means of falsification of other business records, Merchan says the jury can consider records admitted at trial, including bank records associated with Michael Cohen's entities Resolution Consultants LLC and Essential Consultants LLC.
They can also consider Cohen's wire to Keith Davidson, the invoice from AMI's third party consultant to Resolution Consultants LLC and the 1099 miscellaneous forms that the Trump Organization issued to Cohen.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

As Judge Juan Merchan begins reading the jury instructions, he tells the jurors they are responsible for judging the case on the facts.

Quote:

---

"It is not my responsibility to judge the evidence here," Merchan says. "It is yours. You are the judges of the facts and you are responsible for deciding whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty."

---

"In fact, nothing I have said in the course of this trial was meant to suggest I have an opinion about this case," Merchan said.
"If you have formed an impression I do have an opinion, you must put it out of your mind at this time."

---

Quote:

---

Judge Juan Merchan reminds jurors they must not make a decision based on biases or stereotypes.

Quote:

---

"As a juror, you are asked to make a very important decision about another member of the community. I know you would not want to make that decision based on such stereotypes or attitudes," he tells them.

---

"You must set aide any personal opinions you have in favor or against the defendant."

---

Quote:

---

Judge Juan Merchan tells jurors they "may not speculate about matters related to sentence or punishment." He tells the jury that is up to the judge.

---

---

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Quote:

---

"In fact, nothing I have said in the course of this trial was meant to suggest I have an opinion about this case," Merchan said.

"If you have formed an impression I do have an opinion, you must put it out of your mind at this time."

---

Duh...

Is merchant trying to charge Cohen, or Trump?!

BMX Bandit said:

---

MagnumLoad said:

---

So why could the jury instructions take an hour or more? Is reasonable doubt that difficult? Maybe trying to explain how they can find someone guilty of an unspecified crime. Maybe judges are above the law.

---

its 34 counts. he reads the count and law for each one, along with pages and pages of instructions.

---

And conveniently, they have to memorize them or have the judge tell them again? Because being able to just read them would be bad, why???

pacecar02 said:

---

What was the FECA violation? (and again, if the Feds did not bring charges can there really be a determination on a violation?)

I don't see how paying cohens invoices is fraud

Was a specific tax law violation ever cited?

---

If Cohen had only sent one bill, would Trump only be facing one felony?

If Cohen had sent 50 bills, I guess Trump would be facing 16 additional felony counts.


Amazing how this works.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Judge Juan Merchan tells the jury it is unlawful for an individual to willfully make a contribution to any candidate running for office, including the presidency, exceeding certain limits which in the relevant years was $2,700.
Merchan says that if a payment would have been made even in the absence of a candidacy, then the payment should not be treated as a contribution.
He also outlines how things like editorials and other media activity is not considered a political contribution, "so long as such activity is a normal, legitimate press function."

---

Reversible error again.

---

I think they are trying to claim the Catch and Kill payments from AMI are the campaign contributions. Not the Stormy deal.

AgFormerlyInIrving said:

---

FIDO95 said:

---

The ends justify the means.

---

Yep, this is what happens when a group of people (liberals) have no god. Instead, they worship self and politicians. We's so screwed.

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Is merchant trying to charge Cohen, or Trump?!

---

Convict Trump for Cohen's conduct…. whether or not Cohen's conduct here was criminal.

Quote:

---

I think they are trying to claim the Catch and Kill payments from AMI are the campaign contributions. Not the Stormy deal.

---

No it is both. that is what Steinglass said in his summation yesterday.

I don't see how it is even possible for jurors to understand this convoluted case. That's reasonable doubt right there imo

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

As Judge Juan Merchan goes through the jury instructions, some jurors appear to be looking down taking notes.

---

---

Nah, that's like filling out the customs forms while you are on the plane. They are just writing guilty 34 times so they can get home this evening.

Ag with kids said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

MagnumLoad said:

---

So why could the jury instructions take an hour or more? Is reasonable doubt that difficult? Maybe trying to explain how they can find someone guilty of an unspecified crime. Maybe judges are above the law.

---

its 34 counts. he reads the count and law for each one, along with pages and pages of instructions.

---

And conveniently, they have to memorize them or have the judge tell them again? Because being able to just read them would be bad, why???

---

i agree with the poster above in that If you are Trump, you definitely don't want them reading these instructions over and over as they are slanted very much in the prosecutions favor.

MagnumLoad said:

---

I don't see how it is even possible for jurors to understand this convoluted case. That's reasonable doubt right there imo

---

It should be.

We fixed the keg said:

---

FriscoKid said:

---

NDA's are not illegal

---

Kinda where I keep getting stuck. NDA's are used all the time and it isn't uncommon for someone to be paid $$ in return for keeping confidential information private. Not sure how the public was somehow harmed, or owed, this information.

---

It's all tied to election interference. From my casual and infrequent observations, seems like they're saying that the information that they were trying to bury somehow was going to swing the election in Hillary's favor, thus it was election interference.

Again, the real law that was broken was Trump existing.

Tony Franklins Other Shoe said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

As Judge Juan Merchan goes through the jury instructions, some jurors appear to be looking down taking notes.

---

---

Nah, that's like filling out the customs forms while you are on the plane. They are just writing guilty 34 times so they can get home this evening.

---

Would be quicker to find him not guilty of the underlying "crime", then all the other misdemeanors go away due to statute of limitations.

Quote:

---

Judge Juan Merchan is now explaining motive to jurors, and going through the difference between motive and intent.

Meanwhile, Trump is passing a note back and forth with his attorney Todd Blanche.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Judge Juan Merchan explains that the jury must determine whether the Trump conspired to promote a person to or prevent a person from public office by unlawful means.
They must be unanimous on that fact but not on the unlawful means.
Merchan explains the prosecution has three theories of those unlawful means:

• Violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act, otherwise known as FECA
• Falsification of other business records
• Violations of tax laws

---

There is automatic reversible error, right there.

---

How does the math work here?

Does one of those 3 have to have at least 7 votes?

Do they need 7 votes TOTAL out of all 3?

Or how many votes WOULD they need between the 3 "theories"?

This piece of **** judge is not even trying to hide how corrupt he is. He is doing everything in his power to confuse these doors to find Trump guilty of a non-crime. Every day I get more disgusted, but this is absolutely stomach-churning.

aggiehawg said:

---

MagnumLoad said:

---

I don't see how it is even possible for jurors to understand this convoluted case. That's reasonable doubt right there imo

---

It should be.

---

It's going to come down to how many jurors on that jury are liberals and hate Trump regardless of the truth, not that Trump did not commit any crime. I'm truly so disgusted by this.

they need 12 "votes" between the 3 theories based on these instructions, which is the subject of much debate on whether proper and will be "issue no. 1" on any appeal.

Quote:

---

How does the math work here?

Does one of those 3 have to have at least 7 votes?

Do they need 7 votes TOTAL out of all 3?

Or how many votes WOULD they need between the 3 "theories"?

---

There is no math required. They can all disagree which one of those three choices and it won't matter to Merchan.Which of course is highly unconstitutional and Merchan knows that but doesn't care.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

MagnumLoad said:

---

So why could the jury instructions take an hour or more? Is reasonable doubt that difficult? Maybe trying to explain how they can find someone guilty of an unspecified crime. Maybe judges are above the law.

---

its 34 counts. he reads the count and law for each one, along with pages and pages of instructions.

---

And conveniently, they have to memorize them or have the judge tell them again? Because being able to just read them would be bad, why???

---

i agree with the poster above in that If you are Trump, you definitely don't want them reading these instructions over and over as they are slanted very much in the prosecutions favor.

---

Fair enough...