This was an excellent read. I had no idea there was so much drama behind the scenes. We can only hope that the 12 people on the jury will realize how unhanded and crooked Trump really is and find him guilty.
As a British lawyer I have been following your coverage of this trial (as well as Trump’s other legal travails) with huge interest. As well as learning a lot about the U.S. criminal justice system I’ve learnt a lot more about Trump and his Mafia style operations steeped in sleaze. I wonder if he strikes U.S electors like that. Or indeed the jury. It worries me that unlike in England and Wales (both Scotland and Northern Ireland have different legal systems) they must reach a unanimous verdict. It takes only one bad actor for a true verdict to be derailed. We have to hope that the jury selection process (also abolished here) made that less likely.
Thank you for the in-depth coverage and explanations; it clarifies the significance of evidence documenting events and incriminating actions.
The way the story is written, it seems like acquittal is unlikely. However, given Trump's history of avoiding conviction, even with glaring evidence against him, I'm looking for the tactic, not yet revealed, that allows him to escape accountability one more time. Can this case be appealed to the SCOTUS, and overturned by Trump loyalist judges via a 6-3 vote?
Pardon my skepticism, but justice should have been served long ago. Yet it remains to be seen.
A book is definitely in order! I’m not a lawyer - just a regulate person - and I find your accounts of the trial riveting. I don’t know anything about courtroom procedures or terminology, but find your descriptions easy to follow. Even should there be an acquittal (God forbid - I hate to even say that word here) or hung jury, your recording of the events is still invaluable. I would hope you would still compile into a document or unpublished book (or self published) just for the sake of history. When we look back at history, how many times do we rely on the accounts of people at the time who witnessed the events first hand?
I think you’ve got your book Jonathan!!!
YAY!!!
This was an excellent read. I had no idea there was so much drama behind the scenes. We can only hope that the 12 people on the jury will realize how unhanded and crooked Trump really is and find him guilty.
Speaking of the elements necessary to prove intent—when has he ever not defrauded people?
Very funny
As a British lawyer I have been following your coverage of this trial (as well as Trump’s other legal travails) with huge interest. As well as learning a lot about the U.S. criminal justice system I’ve learnt a lot more about Trump and his Mafia style operations steeped in sleaze. I wonder if he strikes U.S electors like that. Or indeed the jury. It worries me that unlike in England and Wales (both Scotland and Northern Ireland have different legal systems) they must reach a unanimous verdict. It takes only one bad actor for a true verdict to be derailed. We have to hope that the jury selection process (also abolished here) made that less likely.
Thank you for the in-depth coverage and explanations; it clarifies the significance of evidence documenting events and incriminating actions.
The way the story is written, it seems like acquittal is unlikely. However, given Trump's history of avoiding conviction, even with glaring evidence against him, I'm looking for the tactic, not yet revealed, that allows him to escape accountability one more time. Can this case be appealed to the SCOTUS, and overturned by Trump loyalist judges via a 6-3 vote?
Pardon my skepticism, but justice should have been served long ago. Yet it remains to be seen.
Thank you once again.
A book is definitely in order! I’m not a lawyer - just a regulate person - and I find your accounts of the trial riveting. I don’t know anything about courtroom procedures or terminology, but find your descriptions easy to follow. Even should there be an acquittal (God forbid - I hate to even say that word here) or hung jury, your recording of the events is still invaluable. I would hope you would still compile into a document or unpublished book (or self published) just for the sake of history. When we look back at history, how many times do we rely on the accounts of people at the time who witnessed the events first hand?