Is it normal to be able to combine juror decisions across multiple charges to come up with 12 to convict someone? I honestly have never heard of this, but admittedly don't follow cases that closely.

Each count is separate Not sure what you are asking

He is referring to the bull**** underlying crime theories.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

He is referring to the bull**** underlying crime theories.

---

This

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

He is referring to the bull**** underlying crime theories.

---

He asked about actual charges. He also asked for lawyer opinions

Muy said:

---

Is it normal to be able to combine juror decisions across multiple charges to come up with 12 to convict someone? I honestly have never heard of this, but admittedly don't follow cases that closely.

---

can someone explain this. I was sort of following the trial thread and it read like if th vote is 4-8 on the 3 counts then they have 12 (unanimous) and guilty verdict?

WTF is that?

agracer said:

---

Muy said:

---

Is it normal to be able to combine juror decisions across multiple charges to come up with 12 to convict someone? I honestly have never heard of this, but admittedly don't follow cases that closely.

---

can someone explain this. I was sort of following the trial thread and it read like if th vote is 4-8 on the 3 counts then they have 12 (unanimous) and guilty verdict?

WTF is that?

---

Sixth Amendment violation.

2040huck said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

He is referring to the bull**** underlying crime theories.

---

He asked about actual charges. He also asked for lawyer opinions

---

Dude you know what I meant, sorry I didn't use the proper wording.

agracer said:

---

Muy said:

---

Is it normal to be able to combine juror decisions across multiple charges to come up with 12 to convict someone? I honestly have never heard of this, but admittedly don't follow cases that closely.

---

can someone explain this. I was sort of following the trial thread and it read like if th vote is 4-8 on the 3 counts then they have 12 (unanimous) and guilty verdict?

WTF is that?

---

You should probably read the actual charge

2040huck said:

---

agracer said:

---

Muy said:

---

Is it normal to be able to combine juror decisions across multiple charges to come up with 12 to convict someone? I honestly have never heard of this, but admittedly don't follow cases that closely.

---

can someone explain this. I was sort of following the trial thread and it read like if th vote is 4-8 on the 3 counts then they have 12 (unanimous) and guilty verdict?

WTF is that?

---

You should probably read the actual charge

---

I'll trust aggiehawg over you, stop trying to deflect the conversation.

2040huck said:

---

agracer said:

---

Muy said:

---

Is it normal to be able to combine juror decisions across multiple charges to come up with 12 to convict someone? I honestly have never heard of this, but admittedly don't follow cases that closely.

---

can someone explain this. I was sort of following the trial thread and it read like if th vote is 4-8 on the 3 counts then they have 12 (unanimous) and guilty verdict?

WTF is that?

---

You should probably read the actual charge

---

You should stop posting if you aren't even going to attempt to participate in the conversation. Can you not just answer the question without trying to insult the person asking it?

2040huck said:

---

agracer said:

---

Muy said:

---

Is it normal to be able to combine juror decisions across multiple charges to come up with 12 to convict someone? I honestly have never heard of this, but admittedly don't follow cases that closely.

---

can someone explain this. I was sort of following the trial thread and it read like if th vote is 4-8 on the 3 counts then they have 12 (unanimous) and guilty verdict?

WTF is that?

---

You should probably read the actual charge

---

can you post a link to it?

Fox News: Judge Merchan Tells the Jury that They Do Not Need Unanimity to Convict and He Will Treat 4-4-4 as a Unanimous Verdict pic.twitter.com/G2Zeiozykt

— Sean Hannity 🇺🇸 (@seanhannity) May 29, 2024

It's been discussed recently in the other thread. There appears to be some precedent in NY that have survived appeals. However, there are still questions if those prior rulings are applicable to this case. Also, some federal rulings were also brought up which were questioned on their applicability as well.

In general, there is an open question if this really does violate the 6th amendment that would possibly need to be resolved by SCOTUS. However, I doubt SCOTUS would want to touch this in an election year.

In a nutshell, the statute forming the basis of the 34 counts involves falsifying business records. That alone is a misdemeanor and is time barred under NY law.

BUT, if that falsification was done to defraud, aid or conceal the commision of another crime, then the falsification would be elevated to a felony charge. Still would have been charged outside of the Statute of Limitations EXCEPT that NY tolled the SOL an extra year due to covid.

Finding that it was done with intent to defraud, aid or conceal another crime would be an enhancement of the charges and thus a required element of the felony charge.

In any other court, that "other crime" also known as the predicate crime also has to be specified with a jury finding that the other crime occurred and was done by the defendant.

But Judge Merchan decided to allow the prosecution to offer three alternative other crimes, a state election law crime (misdemeanor), a state law tax crime (false record) or a federal FECA violation. Any one of the three will do and the jurors do not need to agree on which ones were the predicate crime. In essence the jury does not have to be unanimous on the second element that enhances the charge to a felony.

That is a clear Sixth Amendment violation. They have to be unanimous on all elements in order to find guilt or acquit under the Sixth and the defendant needs to know which crime he has been accused of. Here he did not know which crime he was accused of as there were three alternatives allowed with no specificity as to which one.

SwigAg11 said:

---

It's been discussed recently in the other thread. There appears to be some precedent in NY that have survived appeals. However, there are still questions if those prior rulings are applicable to this case. Also, some federal rulings were also brought up which were questioned on their applicability as well.

In general, there is an open question if this really does violate the 6th amendment that would possibly need to be resolved by SCOTUS. However, I doubt SCOTUS would want to touch this in an election year.

---

Given this entire trial was done because it's an election year, might the SC take it on to make sure a Presidental candidate has a fair election?

This entire process is unnerving to anyone who actually does care about our Constitution.

aggiehawg said:

---

In a nutshell, the statute forming the basis of the 34 counts involves falsifying business records. That alone is a misdemeanor and is time barred under NY law.

BUT, if that falsification was done to defraud, aid or conceal the commision of another crime, then the falsification would be elevated to a felony charge. Still would have been charged outside of the Statute of Limitations EXCEPT that NY tolled the SOL an extra year due to covid.

Finding that it was done with intent to defraud, aid or conceal another crime would be an enhancement of the charges and thus a required element of the felony charge.

In any other court, that "other crime" also known as the predicate crime also has to be specified with a jury finding that the other crime occurred and was done by the defendant.

But Judge Merchan decided to allow the prosecution to offer three alternative other crimes, a state election law crime (misdemeanor), a state law tax crime (false record) or a federal FECA violation. Any one of the three will do and the jurors do not need to agree on which ones were the predicate crime. In essence the jury does not have to be unanimous on the second element that enhances the charge to a felony.

That is a clear Sixth Amendment violation. They have to be unanimous on all elements in order to find guilt or acquit under the Sixth and the defendant needs to know which crime he has been accused of. Here he did not know which crime he was accused of as there were three alternatives allowed with no specificity as to which one.

---

VERY well said. Thank you!

Do you have a verdict prediction? And if guilty, an immediate appeal I assume ... and this drags out for another year or more?

aggiehawg said:

---

In a nutshell, the statute forming the basis of the 34 counts involves falsifying business records. That alone is a misdemeanor and is time barred under NY law.

BUT, if that falsification was done to defraud, aid or conceal the commision of another crime, then the falsification would be elevated to a felony charge. Still would have been charged outside of the Statute of Limitations EXCEPT that NY tolled the SOL an extra year due to covid.

Finding that it was done with intent to defraud, aid or conceal another crime would be an enhancement of the charges and thus a required element of the felony charge.

In any other court, that "other crime" also known as the predicate crime also has to be specified with a jury finding that the other crime occurred and was done by the defendant.

But Judge Merchan decided to allow the prosecution to offer three alternative other crimes, a state election law crime (misdemeanor), a state law tax crime (false record) or a federal FECA violation. Any one of the three will do and the jurors do not need to agree on which ones were the predicate crime. In essence the jury does not have to be unanimous on the second element that enhances the charge to a felony.

That is a clear Sixth Amendment violation. They have to be unanimous on all elements in order to find guilt or acquit under the Sixth and the defendant needs to know which crime he has been accused of. Here he did not know which crime he was accused of as there were three alternatives allowed with no specificity as to which one.

---

Thank you for this clear and succinct explanation!

If the appeal process drags this out past the Election day, can the Biden DOJ do anything that would impact Trump's ability to run?

Quote:

---

Do you have a verdict prediction? And if guilty, an immediate appeal I assume ... and this drags out for another year or more?

---

Average length of appeal in the appellate division is 16-18 months. After that can be appealed to the state Court of Appeals and from there, SCOTUS.

I know Mark Levin has a theory that SCOTUS could take this up immediately by use of a common law writ but I consider that extremely unlikely. SCOTUS won't have enough votes to grant cert. on such a novel basis.

Muy said:

---

If the appeal process drags this out past the Election day, can the Biden DOJ do anything that would impact Trump's ability to run?

---

No.

That 14th Amendment stuff would not apply to this case and anyway SCOTUS already threw that out.

Is 2040 on staff? Why would my post to him about aggiehawg actually participating in a discussion be deleted? That is in no way out of bounds.

2040huck said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

He is referring to the bull**** underlying crime theories.

---

He asked about actual charges. He also asked for lawyer opinions

---

obtuse

adjective
1. annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand.

The jury has to be unanimous in finding that he was attempting to cover up a crime. That's the element.

They do not have to be unanimous in determining which crime he was attempting to cover up. He's not being charged for those alleged crimes.

There's a recent analog in Texas. One of the ways to get to capital punishment is to show the defendant killed multiple people. A nurse was put on trial for killing one of his patients. He was accused of killing many more. One of the deaths was the primary charge. In order to reach a guilty verdict on the capital murder charge, the jury had to unanimously find that he had killed more than one person but they did not have to unanimously agree which specific other person he killed. It's working its way through the appellate courts now.

aggiehawg said:

---

In a nutshell, the statute forming the basis of the 34 counts involves falsifying business records. That alone is a misdemeanor and is time barred under NY law.

BUT, if that falsification was done to defraud, aid or conceal the commision of another crime, then the falsification would be elevated to a felony charge. Still would have been charged outside of the Statute of Limitations EXCEPT that NY tolled the SOL an extra year due to covid.

Finding that it was done with intent to defraud, aid or conceal another crime would be an enhancement of the charges and thus a required element of the felony charge.

In any other court, that "other crime" also known as the predicate crime also has to be specified with a jury finding that the other crime occurred and was done by the defendant.

But Judge Merchan decided to allow the prosecution to offer three alternative other crimes, a state election law crime (misdemeanor), a state law tax crime (false record) or a federal FECA violation. Any one of the three will do and the jurors do not need to agree on which ones were the predicate crime. In essence the jury does not have to be unanimous on the second element that enhances the charge to a felony.

That is a clear Sixth Amendment violation. They have to be unanimous on all elements in order to find guilt or acquit under the Sixth and the defendant needs to know which crime he has been accused of. Here he did not know which crime he was accused of as there were three alternatives allowed with no specificity as to which one.

---

So if its a clear violation and there is a conviction, then would an appeals court easily see it and decide accordingly? I assume all those in the legal community see same? I don't see a conviction happening but curious if there will be an ongoing discussion among legal scholars about it being an obvious violation that should have been remedied early on.

aggiehawg said:

---

agracer said:

---

Muy said:

---

Is it normal to be able to combine juror decisions across multiple charges to come up with 12 to convict someone? I honestly have never heard of this, but admittedly don't follow cases that closely.

---

can someone explain this. I was sort of following the trial thread and it read like if th vote is 4-8 on the 3 counts then they have 12 (unanimous) and guilty verdict?

WTF is that?

---

Sixth Amendment violation.

---

Can you tell me the US Constitution is still in effect?

Quote:

---

Can you tell me the US Constitution is still in effect?

---

Not in NY, apparently.

aggiehawg said:

---

In a nutshell, the statute forming the basis of the 34 counts involves falsifying business records. That alone is a misdemeanor and is time barred under NY law.

BUT, if that falsification was done to defraud, aid or conceal the commision of another crime, then the falsification would be elevated to a felony charge. Still would have been charged outside of the Statute of Limitations EXCEPT that NY tolled the SOL an extra year due to covid.

Finding that it was done with intent to defraud, aid or conceal another crime would be an enhancement of the charges and thus a required element of the felony charge.

In any other court, that "other crime" also known as the predicate crime also has to be specified with a jury finding that the other crime occurred and was done by the defendant.

But Judge Merchan decided to allow the prosecution to offer three alternative other crimes, a state election law crime (misdemeanor), a state law tax crime (false record) or a federal FECA violation. Any one of the three will do and the jurors do not need to agree on which ones were the predicate crime. In essence the jury does not have to be unanimous on the second element that enhances the charge to a felony.

That is a clear Sixth Amendment violation. They have to be unanimous on all elements in order to find guilt or acquit under the Sixth and the defendant needs to know which crime he has been accused of. Here he did not know which crime he was accused of as there were three alternatives allowed with no specificity as to which one.

---

Thank You.

So does the NY prosecutor not have to charge and prove the elements of the predicate crime?

And how does a NY state prosecution have authority to prove that Trump committed Federal Election fraud? And how does the judge not let the defendant provide evidence that he did not violate any Federal election laws if the jury finding on that issue is at the heart of convicting him?

AtticusMatlock said:

---

The jury has to be unanimous in finding that he was attempting to cover up a crime. That's the element.

They do not have to be unanimous in determining which crime he was attempting to cover up. He's not being charged for those alleged crimes.

There's a recent analog in Texas. One of the ways to get to capital punishment is to show the defendant killed multiple people. A nurse was put on trial for killing one of his patients. He was accused of killing many more. One of the deaths was the primary charge. In order to reach a guilty verdict on the capital murder charge, the jury had to unanimously find that he had killed more than one person but they did not have to unanimously agree which specific other person he killed. It's working its way through the appellate courts now.

---

Killing anyone is (potentially) a crime. Making ledger entries is not.

hth

CowboyGirl said:

---

So does the NY prosecutor not have to charge and prove the elements of the predicate crime?

---

They aren't even attempting to do so.

Quote:

---

And how does a NY state prosecution have authority to prove that Trump committed Federal Election fraud?

---

It doesn't.

Quote:

---

And how does the judge not let the defendant provide evidence that he did not violate any Federal election laws if the jury finding on that issue is at the heart of convicting him?

---

Not only that, but he wouldn't let the former head of the FEC testify as to why what happened wasn't a violation. But he DID let Michael Cohen say definitively that it WAS a crime. He did let the prosecutor say that it was a crime.

Muy said:

---

Is it normal to be able to combine juror decisions across multiple charges to come up with 12 to convict someone? I honestly have never heard of this, but admittedly don't follow cases that closely.

---

The only crime in Texas that is analogous, that I can think of, is Continues Sexual Abuse of a Child. In that crime prosecutors allege IN THE INDICTMENT all of the prior instances of sexual abuse such as Indecency with a Child by Exposure and Indecency with a Child by Contact and Aggravated Sexual Assault of a Child. In Texas the jury does NOT have to UNANIMOUSLY agree on the specific instances of prior sexual misconduct against this child just must agree unanimously that prior sexual misconduct with this child occurred.

A huge difference in Texas are these prior crimes committed against this child must be alleged in the indictment. Apparently that is not required in NY under this statute. Hard to believe.

Equally hard to believe is the jury does not get to take a copy of the jury charge with them for deliberations. That makes it extremely hard on the jury.

AtticusMatlock said:

---

The jury has to be unanimous in finding that he was attempting to cover up a crime. That's the element.

They do not have to be unanimous in determining which crime he was attempting to cover up. He's not being charged for those alleged crimes.

There's a recent analog in Texas. One of the ways to get to capital punishment is to show the defendant killed multiple people. A nurse was put on trial for killing one of his patients. He was accused of killing many more. One of the deaths was the primary charge. In order to reach a guilty verdict on the capital murder charge, the jury had to unanimously find that he had killed more than one person but they did not have to unanimously agree which specific other person he killed. It's working its way through the appellate courts now.

---

Not sure I understand your comparison. What are those underlying crimes in Trump's case? Murder is pretty clear.