quote:

Originally posted by Flashlightboy:
If he's acquitted then it's moot, of course.

Would it be moot as far as the judge is concerned? No reprecussions for going rogue like this?

quote:

Originally posted by Keystoner:

quote:

Originally posted by Flashlightboy:
If he's acquitted then it's moot, of course.

Would it be moot as far as the judge is concerned? No reprecussions for going rogue like this?

Depends on the state. In Missouri (where I am), there can be complaints filed, usually through the State Attorney General"s Office (HAHA, if that is the rule in New York, do you think Letica James will do anything) or directly to the State Supreme Court, who can order an review and take appropriate action/discipline. Rumor has it that Meachem was already "admonished"for doing something similar (maybe openly giving campaign donations and not recusing himself).

quote:

Originally posted by Keystoner:

quote:

Originally posted by Flashlightboy:
If he's acquitted then it's moot, of course.

Would it be moot as far as the judge is concerned? No reprecussions for going rogue like this?

No, I think there's already an ethics complaint filed against the judge that will have its own life, regardless of what the jury decides.

quote:

Originally posted by jsbcody:

quote:

Originally posted by Keystoner:

quote:

Originally posted by Flashlightboy:
If he's acquitted then it's moot, of course.

Would it be moot as far as the judge is concerned? No reprecussions for going rogue like this?

Depends on the state. In Missouri (where I am), there can be complaints filed, usually through the State Attorney General"s Office (HAHA, if that is the rule in New York, do you think Letica James will do anything) or directly to the State Supreme Court, who can order an review and take appropriate action/discipline. Rumor has it that Meachem was already "admonished"for doing something similar (maybe openly giving campaign donations and not recusing himself).

6guns post on page 933 outlines one complaint already filed.

At least he has some support already from SCOTUS! This should carry over to the travesty happening in NYC...

https://www.westernjournal.com...e-trump-jan-6-cases/

^^^ Again

https://epoch.daily.theepochti...a7a3ef715922f6cc2844

I'm suspending your sentence, bronicabill, and that's in spite of the shit from you that hit the moderation queue, telling me how unfairly you've been treated, and that I should be a man about it.

When this started, I told you I didn't want to hear it here, and your response was to say, in essence, "I knew I was defying you."

Then, when you get put on moderated status, you post, in essence, "What?? What did I do?"

I don't like games like that, but I'll tell you what I like even less, and that's defeatists. I don't want to be associated with men who cry about losing, before a battle is finished. I don't want to be around such people and I don't want to listen to such people, and I don't care what you or anyone else on this planet thinks about that.

Don't come in here talking about how we're going to lose. Don't ever post anything like that here. I mean it.

You should consider yourself fortunate to be let back in here right now, especially when one of the things that hit the moderation queue was you telling me to be a man.

That's some real bullshit right there. I don't need lessons from you on what it takes for me to be a man, and if you want to get shown the door for good, say that to me again.

Now, behave yourself. Follow my directives, and most of all, when it comes to forthright behavior, you put your own house in order before you criticize anyone else.

That's the end of it.

Thank you, and a public apology for going against your desires!

Edit to add from a post on another site: Nothing sucks more than that moment during an argument when you realize you're wrong.

Again, my apologies!!!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: bronicabill,

quote:

Originally posted by Keystoner:

quote:

Originally posted by Flashlightboy:
I'm sure the SCOTUS is following this closely, as are NY appellate judges. If he's acquitted then it's moot, of course.

But a judge telling the jury that he's breaking them into three different camps and each one is to work on a different federal crime? Jurors 5-12 have no say on the charges that jurors 1-4 are deliberating? That's beyond whacked.

On the other hand, if, say, jurors 1-4 and jurors 5-8 find him not guilty but jurors 9-12 do on their crime, does that mean he's guilty of that crime when 2/3 of the jurors weren't part of the deliberation? 4 out of 4 is unanimous? I truly hope there's more to this separate camp story.

This is just bizarre as fuck.

Is there any precedent for this? Does a judge have the authority to do whatever he wants in his/her courtroom at any given point in time? What I'm asking is, can a higher authority intervene or do a judge's orders stand until appeal?

A great question and I am really curious as well: question for the legal experts then— Is there any real time enforcement mechanism against abuse of power in the judicial branch? You just have to let the process happen and then appeal? If so and given these circumstances, that structure appears utterly inadequate. From my view the judge is willfully breaking the law because there is a Supreme Court decision explicitly stating he cannot do what he is doing.

I don’t think the USSC cares one way or another. For a group that is supposed to be a co-equal of the government it certainly gives the appearance that it doesn’t give a shit what happens unless it can make its way through the system and even then they may or may not decide to do something.

One would think the court might consider being proactive when it sees a travesty of justice unfolding before it’s eyes. I can understand being ignorant of what’s going on - that explains Sotomeyer and Kagan.

Why bother having a system of laws if apparently they don’t mean anything.

The Supreme Court is selective of what it will hear. The appellate branches in the Federal and State courts are supposed to stem the tide of cases that make it to the highest court, by following the decision and precedents of the USSC.

Another, unexplored thought train is Judge Merchan, knows there is no conviction coming. Don't think I'm crazy yet, he's deeply indebted to the Democratic machine in NY, and Obama/Biden. Merchan knows his only hope of protection post trial from NY Republicans is the NY Democrat machine, when Trump wins in November, NY isn't going to suddenly become a red state. He's playing in someways both sides of the fence. Trump will still have a deep state DOJ and other agencies to clean house, and the optics of Trump going after Merchan, will hurt the mid term races. Merchan keeps his masters happy, by putting his finger on the scales, but he also maybe insuring an overturning or reversal by a higher court. The man is not stupid, owned by the Democrat machine, definitely. A judge will know even the most mentally challenged of the lot, that Burden shifting is grounds for appeal, dividing jurors, or removing the unanimous standard is a sure reversal. Despite his incorrect trial rulings, he also knows, the appellate division, or Court of Appeals in NY State, doesn't want to be slapped by the 2nd Circuit, or The Supreme Court.He keeps his gullible Democratic handlers happy by appearing to tank the case, but ultimately knowing, no matter what he does, Trump will be acquitted, or a hung jury, or the appellate process will flip it if Trump isn't successful, either way to the snakes he's done what he could.

I tend to think the simpler explanation is most likely: the judge is a Democrat TDS maniac. He's certainly acting like it, and Democrats generally have no guiding moral principles except whatever they feel at the time. I don't think our political adversaries are playing 4D chess, I think they are emotional & petty hypocrites and their behavior reflects as much.

I seldom pray, but today I prayed that the jury will reach the only logical verdict, that Donald J Trump is not guilty on all charges.
In my 58 years of life, only one other president has been as great as Donald J Trump, that being Ronald Reagan.

Welcome, Only Sig and Glock!

https://x.com/_johnnymaga/stat...ury-deliberations%2F

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
The question, then, is do they wish to be part of this historic travesty, or do they want to retain their integrity.

This is the crux of the whole trial, the outcome now lies in the hands of 12 citizens. They aren't politicians, media assholes, or movers and shakers that all have a direct political stake in a verdict of guilty, these are 12 ordinary citizens from all walks of life. This whole trial is an obvious 100% sham, the corruption all out in the open, no doubt. Do the jurors want to be partners in pulling off one of the most corrupt actions in American political history? If Alan Dershowitz can be bewildered by what he witnessed, then others can as well. In my heart, I believe most people are not evil like the political elite I mentioned above. I'm sure yesterday in the jury room, it was contentious, arguments flying back and forth, votes taken. And it continues today. I have to have faith that in the face of absolute corruption, that 12 ordinary citizens will come up with the right decision.

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
The question, then, is do they wish to be part of this historic travesty, or do they want to retain their integrity.

This is the crux of the whole trial, the outcome now lies in the hands of 12 citizens. They aren't politicians, media assholes, or movers and shakers that all have a direct political stake in a verdict of guilty, these are 12 ordinary citizens from all walks of life. This whole trial is an obvious 100% sham, ...

In the criminal trial jury I served on mentioned a few pages back, I learned something. The trial was in Oakland, CA, arguably as liberal or more so than NYC. Oakland has those of privilege living in the hills, and the ordinary folks down on the flats. On my jury, the folks from the flats were very down to earth, knew bullshit at the faintest whiff, and had no tolerance for it. While there are plenty on the flats one wouldn't want on a jury, they had rap sheets so long they never entered the jury box for questioning. The ones that made it on the jury were tired of what they saw happening in the part of the community they lived in.

I bring all this up for this reason: we saw the Trump rally in the Bronx and there is apparently a lot of ordinary NYC residents tired of the bullshit the power structure has been shoving down their throats. If a few of those people made it on to the jury, a guilty verdict is not guaranteed. If the NYC justice system can railroad a rich white man with power and political connections, just imagine what he does to the lower echelon of society.

Merchan is a corrupt judge on steroids. He isn't playing both sides. He does not expect to pay any penalty whatsoever for his unlawful actions. His daughter is getting rich off this.

I've never heard of intervention into an ongoing trial based only on rulings of the trial judge. Everything is on the record and the recourse is appeal. I suppose if the judge lost it and became crazy, that might be an exception, and then it goes to what each state allows as to how to handle it. Courts usually have a chief judge or ombudsman to handle things like that and it's rare.

Another NY quirk I learned yesterday is that the judge has the power to remove a juror even after deliberations have started. Usually, the jurors are seated and at the end of the trial the alternates are removed by lot and discharged. The remaining twelve jurors are charged and take it from there.

In this case, 14 were seated, two removed, but the judge did not discharge those two in case one of the 12 needs to be removed. This can basically take the case away from the jury system of justice. Then on X last night I saw Dershowitz say the exact same thing, expressing a fear that the biased judge could sniff out a hold out to convict, then make a record, and remove him. Dershowitz said he's seen it happen.

On a positive note, was just listening on Fox of the appearance of the jurors when the judge was re-reading requested jury instructions. It sounds like there may be several jurors who aren't on board with a conviction. If that is the case, then the prosecution failed in it's burden and the verdict should be not guilty. However for that to happen, scorned TDS jurors would have to eat crow, and how likely is that to happen? We know what they're like, unhinged crazies.

you have more faith in a broken and dysfunctional legal system than I do

this is NYC, for all the man has done for the city they hate him - I mean they truly hate him, and the jury was selected to ensure they all hate him

whats the penalty for a kangaroo court? whats the penalty for subverting the constitution? whats the penalty for fabricating evidence? whats the penalty for railroading?

apparently none - at least in NYC, and the State hasn't done zip either

that makes the ALL complicit in this travesty and they only way we will ever stop this behavior is to have our own Nuremberg style trial when this is said and done. Do to them what they've done to us, but with finality. Trail, sentence. No waiting. No appeals. From the State AG to the local prosecutors and judges.

We want our legal system back and as long as they're infected with these leeches, we never will. We need a first magnitude purge.

I have no doubt that Trump will win - but at what cost to the country? These people aren't Americans. We shouldn't treat them or give them the benefits of being such.

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
you have more faith in a broken and dysfunctional legal system than I do

i don't know how you concluded that