|
Willa Rogers posted:That's ridiculous. A media outlet shouldn't be forced to air anything at the government's behest, especially when there are numerous alternatives for viewers. Silly Burrito just said it should be and that they aren't is indicative of their priorities. As far as I know, he isn't the government. Also, that's not what fascism means, lol.
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2022 01:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 17:52 |
|
|
They still don't know who planted the two pipe bombs either. They have the video, but the person is completely covered and masked.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2022 02:15
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1593677077827522567 Special Counsels are for when the DOJ prosecuting someone may be a conflict of interest or seen as politically motivated. That's why Ken Starr prosecuted Clinton instead of the AG. Even if Trump never announced he was running for President again, they probably would have done it. But. once Trump announced he was running it was basically inevitable.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2022 19:58
|
|
|
Automata 10 Pack posted:Lol, is that how they're going to scoot responsibility for not charging Trump? It doesn't necessarily mean one thing or another. It was triggered by Trump announcing his campaign and not any specific evidence or desire to prosecute. Whether Garland desperately wanted to avoid prosecuting Trump or absolutely wanted to nail him at any cost, this would have happened anyway once Trump declared. It's "good" in the sense that it means that Garland doesn't want to just throw the whole case. But, it's not that significant on its own. If the likelihood of prosecution was a 50 on a 100-point scale before, then it is a 51 today. It isn't really something you should be excited or worried about in terms of the likelihood of actual prosecution.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2022 20:30
|
|
|
OgNar posted:That was truly dumber than anything I could have thought of. I've gone and made ILLEGAL .JPEG COPIES of some of the NFTs and D&D is having a photoshop/caption contest to celebrate. Posters can win YUGE prizes! Thread: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=4019787 OP (with some of the illegal NFTs for everyone to browse) Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2022 20:28
|
|
Prizes
|
Failed Imagineer posted:Wait, I don't remember getting my picture taken shaking hands with Trump.... It was that same year that Time named you "Person of the Year"
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2022 21:12
|
|
|
Inner Light posted:Hey folks. How soon do you all think we will know if these criminal referrals are a nothingburger just like almost everything Tyrmp related the last 5+ years? Few more months, few more years? The DOJ doesn't care about criminal referrals from Congress. They do care about evidence. If any of the evidence they are sending over to the DOJ is significant, then it will have an impact. The actual referral itself has no legal impact. It's just a way to make charges more high-profile (but, this case is already about as high-profile as it gets).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2022 20:57
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:Does constantly calling himself "President" in all legal filings grate on all the judges* like I'm assuming it does? Judges are basically the last people in the world who would get annoyed by using titles and respect for institutions. I've had judges arguing against Zoom hearings and bringing all proceedings back to in-person in January 2021 because they were concerned that "everyone is looking directly at each other on Zoom" and "it may diminish respect for the judiciary" because when they are in person, they have to look up at the Judge and can see their name card that says "The Honorable Judge X" on it. On Zoom, everyone is at eye-level and using the name "The Honorable Judge X" on Zoom won't show the entire name when there are multiple people in the Zoom room.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2023 22:23
|
|
|
Randalor posted:So was the reason they're taking a month off then because they expect it to take that long to lay seige to Mar-a-Lago and starve him out and into custody? The AP says his attorneys have arranged for him to surrender on Monday. https://apnews.com/article/trump-hush-money-new-york-indictment-election-027d0e5ac1881a4c55c6379deae75faa
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2023 23:28
|
|
|
Killer robot posted:CNN is saying 30 business fraud charges, so it sounds like more than just Stormy Daniels but I don't know. Number of charges doesn't necessarily mean there were many other instances of the offense. Some laws are just written that way. You can download a torrent of a single zip file with a bunch of pictures in it and catch 300 charges of copyright infringement or possession of child porn.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2023 01:57
|
|
|
Trump basically admitted to taking classified documents with the intent to sell them back to the U.S. (or at least profit from them in some way) in an interview with Hannity. Specifically, he cites that "Nixon got $18 million" from the federal government for his documents and the Watergate tapes. I love Hannity desperately trying to shift the conversation once he realizes that he set Trump up to deny the whole thing and he is just diving in to admit it instead. https://twitter.com/NoLieWithBTC/status/1642869119748911104
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2023 19:31
|
|
|
fuctifino posted:How normal is it for someone to avoid mugshot, handcuffs and a cell? I understand rich white people experience a different form of justice in the US, and I also understand that being an ex president adds so many complexities with the Secret Service etc. Not being held pre-trial is extremely common. If you are allowed to turn yourself in and be released on your own recognizance or pay bail, then you don't usually get handcuffed either. Not getting a mugshot for felonies is very unusual, but the point of the mugshot is primarily to have a photo on file to identify defendants. Probably not necessary for someone to need photos of Trump to identify him.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2023 01:56
|
|
|
AvesPKS posted:I mean there's gotta be a file created at some point in the process, are they just going to paste his presidential portrait there or something? Most criminal history files are electronic in CJIS/NCIC. CJIS/NCIC is also ancient mainframe software that does not include media. Mugshot policy is handled at the state level (some states have public mugshot websites, some ban mugshots from being made public, and some require the defendant to agree to release them). Generally, states will have their own case management or records system that includes mugshots or just links to their driver's license page - which includes their DMV picture.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2023 02:29
|
|
|
IT BURNS posted:For those wondering about felonies, their potential sentences, etc.: Those are federal charges. He's being charged at the state level. The sentences are similar, but NYS uses Class E felonies for charges that would otherwise be a misdemeanor, but were committed as part of a larger underlying crime. Not clear what larger underlying crime the DA is alleging right now.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2023 14:56
|
|
|
V-Men posted:The campaign finance violations, IIRC. That is what is assumed, but it hasn't been made public yet. Also, there were reports that the prosecutors were probing about Karen McDougal during the grand jury and the possibility that they are seeking something broader than just Stormy Daniels.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2023 15:36
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Calling the judge "highly partisan" and a kangaroo court like three hours before getting arraigned in front of him, you love to see it Ironically, I think this is the one time where working the refs might be a good idea. The judge is going to be extremely aware that this is going to have political implications and will go out of his way to make sure the court doesn't seem political and uphold the decorum of the institution. Which means Trump can flood the airwaves and likely won't be punished for it because it will just "prove" that the judge is biased against him. I think the judge likely won't take any unilateral steps on punitive measures unless the prosecution gets really aggressive in asking for them.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2023 15:43
|
|
|
V-Men posted:I thought the McDougal payments were essentially the same as the Daniels payments. Cohen paid them off to benefit the campaign, Trump reimbursed him, and the Trump Organization billed it as legal expenses. They are similar, but McDougal was part of the "catch and kill" scheme with the National Enquirer. It wasn't an explicit hush money situation like with Stormy Daniels. It was a conspiracy betwen AMI media and Trump to purchase the exclusive rights to individual women's stories and then refuse to publish them. But, they were buying them on behalf of Trump without telling the women that this was the explicit purpose of the exchange (they told McDougal that she would appear on two magazine covers and get a column for her story). Trump reimbursed Cohen, but we don't know if he reimbursed AMI. If he didn't, then it wouldn't be a direct campaign finance violation, but it would be explicit evidence that Trump conspired and knowingly was involved in the payments and make Michael Cohen's testimony considered corroborated if AMI testified the same thing. There are also rumors and comments from Cohen that there were more than just two women involved and the financial and conspiracy aspects may have been larger than publicly reported. But, we'll probably know for sure pretty soon! Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 15:56 on Apr 4, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2023 15:53
|
|
|
Arraignment is at 2:15 and the DA says they issue a press release with all the details of the charges and hold a press conference to take questions immediately afterward. I'm going to take a wild guess and assume that Trump is getting knocked to the top of the 2:15 arraignment calendar. If that is the case (and they start on time, which is a big "if" most of the time), then they will probably be putting out the press release around 3:00 pm. https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1643252078561640449
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2023 16:15
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:I also think that Trump won't get a complete gag order, but for completely different reasons: gag orders exist to prevent participants from tainting the jury, and I don't think there's any judge on the planet who seriously expects to get a jury with no prior opinion on whether or not Donald J Trump has been unfairly persecuted by the system. Judges will frequently give out contempt charges or gag orders for disrespecting the court or attacking the prosecution/defense in public. If Trump was a normal person doing all of this, then there is a very good chance he would get hit with sanctions of some kind if he didn't stop. Also, no judge is going to openly admit that it is impossible to get an impartial jury. They are going to ask jurors if they can put aside any biases to come to an objective decision or if their mind is already made up and they will only pick someone who answers "Yes" to both. Even if it is impossible, they would never say that out loud or use it as a justification for a process ruling.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2023 16:21
|
|
|
Grip it and rip it posted:Maybe we will get a bench trial? I doubt it though Never in a billion years would Trump want a NJT and if I was his attorney, then I would never in a million years advise him to get an NJT.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2023 16:27
|
|
|
The only thing I would be worried about if I were Trump's attorneys is that the venue is in Manhattan. If I were them, I'd be asking for a change of venue to Long Island for jury selection.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2023 16:37
|
|
|
Trump is apparently going to document his surrender and arrest process with a professional videographer, including a staged perp walk, as part of a documentary/BTS video and series of pictures he will be releasing shortly after. https://twitter.com/KristenhCNN/status/1643252350742609920
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2023 16:48
|
|
|
Uglycat posted:It doesn't seem like there's any groundswell of support for trump on the street level It's Manhattan. There was a rally of about 100 people that MTG went to earlier. There are almost 3x as many counter protesters and almost 100 media there alone.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2023 18:46
|
|
|
There's one conspiracy charge and all the rest are falsifying business records. Conspiracy is not really surprising at all if they are including the McDougal and AMI stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2023 20:06
|
|
|
cr0y posted:What's a protection order for discovery? It means that Trump can't disclose information in public or harass/name witnesses involved in the case who he learns of from discovery in the case.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2023 20:56
|
|
|
Trump should thank the DA because they determined in their investigation that the doorman at Trump tower who was paid $30,000 to not talk to anyone about a child Trump had out of wedlock was not true. Also, he apparently mailed the checks for the hush money. It would be very funny if he used USPS.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2023 21:01
|
|
|
Who in the world and why in the world was someone recording this?!?quote:In a conversation captured in an audio recording in approximately September lol at Trump trying to cheap out on payment even on hush money: quote:Trump told Cohen "if they could delay the payment until after the election, they could avoid paying altogether, because at that point it would not matter if the story became public. " quote:"The Defendant thanked the AMI CEO for handling the stories of the Doorman and Woman 1, and If they have any physical evidence of this, then that could be bad for Trump. Not sure if this is based on testimony or not, though. quote:"In the months that followed, the Defendant and others engaged in a public
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2023 21:17
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:Wasn't he just cast out? I honestly am unaware. God throws him in prison for 1,000 years and then he is supposed to return to earth to lead all of us astray, appoint the anti-Christ, and then Jesus will come back. Pretty sure he has been down there for way more than 1,000 years at this point, so God must have extended his sentence.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2023 19:47
|
|
|
Randalor posted:A quick Google search shows the only reference to Satan actually being cast out and imprisoned happens during the events of Revelation, which was a vision of the end of the world. So no, ol' Scratch is still running around tempting people for shits and giggles. Revelation, Gog and Magog, etc. is more than just "a vision of the end of the world." It's supposed to be a description of how the earth is literally fated to end and how Jesus will come back. Revelation is where the concept of the second coming is established and if you believe that Jesus is coming back (which technically all Christians are supposed to believe), then it is supposed to be a literal description of how it is going down. There just seems to be a lot of debate on when Jesus is coming back and when that 1,000-year timer is supposed to start (or has already started) ticking.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2023 20:13
|
|
|
Thom12255 posted:The idea of Revelation all being an end of the world prophecy book is a modern American evangelical idea - it's not mainstream for most of the Chruch. The common interpretation was that it was talking about the Roman Empire and Nero in the time it was written to give Christians hope and all the weird imagery in it was code that Christians back then would've understood and interpreted correctly but now seems outlandish and odd to anyone else and that's how you get the Left Behind series. Only the last three chapters are considered a telling of a future event by everyone when Jesus returns and Heaven and Earth joined forever. Christian millennialism is way older than modern Christianity and not American in origin. It started around 100 AD, but the book of revelations and millennialism went mainstream in 1517 with the protestant reformation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennialism
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2023 20:31
|
|
|
Silly Burrito posted:No word on the possible sentencing though as of now, correct? Sentencing comes later. Max sentence is 20 years, but very unlikely they get close to the max.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2023 16:25
|
|
|
Grip it and rip it posted:Why is that? All of this seems pretty goddamn aggravated Federal sentencing guidelines are going to recommend less than half the maximum sentence for something like that with limited previous criminal history. It is likely to be between 5 and 7 years. Seditious conspiracy is so rarely prosecuted that it does make it a little hard to predict. The judge could also just ignore the guidelines. But, if I had to put money on it, I would say it ends up around 5-7 years for that charge.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2023 18:36
|
|
|
Murgos posted:DOJ recommended 25 years for Rhodes. So, 15ish is definitely in play. The DOJ prosecutors ask isn't the same as federal sentencing guidelines for the judge. The prosecution generally asks for as high as they can reasonably get if there is no plea deal. The DOJ asked for 15 years in a couple of the other more serious January 6th cases that ended up only getting sentenced for 3.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2023 03:46
|
|
|
Murgos posted:It looks like the DoJ is applying the standard as written. The question will be if the judge agrees with their reading. That, for example, an upward departure for terrorism applies based on the wording of that section. 25 years is way above the federal sentencing guidelines. They are most likely asking for a terrorism enhancement for the sentencing.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2023 03:57
|
|
|
I double checked the DOJ filing and they are asking for a terrorism enhancement. This is what they say in their filing where they specifically ask the judge to go above the sentencing guidelines:quote:These defendants were prepared to fight. Not for their country, but against it. In their own words, they were 'willing to die' in a 'guerilla war' to achieve their goal of halting the transfer of power after the 2020 Presidential Election. These defendants stand out among January 6 defendants because they not only joined in this horrific attack on our democracy as it unfolded, but they all took steps, in advance of January 6, to call for and prepare for such an attack. Edit: And here's a CBS News article stating it in less lawyer-y language: quote:Prosecutors asked the judge to go above the standard sentencing guidelines, arguing the crimes deserve a longer sentence for terrorism because the goal was to influence the government through intimidation or coercion. They also argued Rhodes has not accepted responsibility for his actions, "still presents a threat to American democracy and lives and does not believe he has done anything wrong." https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/news/proud-boys-seditious-conspiracy-trial-verdict/
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2023 04:02
|
|
|
Murgos posted:So, “if the judge agrees with their reading” then? I'm not saying it is some kind of gotcha. I'm just saying that there is an actual sentencing mathematical calculation. The DOJ filing is specifically asking for the judge to depart from the guidelines a "normal" person would get due to their sentencing score because of the uniqueness of the case. Seditious conspiracy does not have an official offense level. Generally, the agreement has been to consider "equivalent" sentencing and make an agreement with the defense over the charge. Seditious conspiracy is very rare, but they have generally prosecuted it under treason offense levels. That puts it at a base level of 14. There would be additions for violence, planning, etc. Those would bring it up to a 27 or 29. Assuming they go with the higher 29, then someone with minimal criminal history would be recommended a sentence between 7.25 years and 9 years. Invoking the terrorism enhancement is basically asking the judge to throw out the sentencing guidelines calculations and criminal history adjustments because the offense was so uniquely bad that it qualifies as terrorism and can't be judged on the normal scale. Normally, the equivalent crime would not earn more than a recommended 9 years maximum for someone without a major previous criminal history. But, the DOJ is asking them to throw out the criminal history adjustment calculation because it is a unique situation. You can check a plea agreement the DOJ filed with a member of the Oath keepers from last year where they lay out the sentencing guidelines and agree that they won't seek "a departure from the guideline range" by invoking the terrorism enhancement because of the plea deal. The sentencing guidelines recommended a sentence between 7.25 years and 9 years. But, he eventually got 5.25 years and 6.5 years for seditious conspiracy because he agreed to cooperate. https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/case-multi-defendant/file/1497916/download Ultimately, the sentencing guidelines are 100% optional. The Supreme Court struck down mandatory sentencing guidelines back in the early 2000's. It's slightly pedantic, but the point of the DOJ's filing is that they want to impose a sentence that would be out of the "normal" guideline range because the crime is so unique that it does not have an official offense level and so especially heinous that they are asking for a sentence near the statutory maximum because it isn't an offense you want to allow even the possibility of having the defendant "re-offend." They call the sentence a "departure" from the guidelines and make the argument why a departure due to the terrorism enhancement is justified even though he wasn't technically convicted of any terrorism laws spelled out in the statute for the terrorism exemption (but, they are asking the judge to consider the conspiracy charge as an "attempt to influence the conduct of the government" and be considered terrorism). Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 21:01 on May 7, 2023 |
|
#
¿
May 7, 2023 20:45
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:I mean, if you actually believed in a "terrorism enhancement" to sentencing as a good thing (which I do not), isn't attacking a legislative body to make them keep your dictator in charge the exact situation you'd want to use it the most? That is basically what the DOJ is arguing. They are saying that seditious conspiracy doesn't technically fall under the terrorism enhancement under a strict reading, but they should basically consider what they did terrorism for those exact reasons. They are arguing that it meets the qualification because it was "an attempt to influence the conduct of government," which is one of the qualifications for a federal terrorism charge. The federal terrorism statute includes a bunch of wildly specific things other than the "attempt to influence" portion: quote:the term “Federal crime of terrorism” means an offense that— (A) is calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government conduct; and (B) is a violation of— (i) section 32 (relating to destruction of aircraft or aircraft facilities), 37 (relating to violence at international airports), 81 (relating to arson within special maritime and territorial jurisdiction), 175 or 175b (relating to biological weapons), 175c (relating to variola virus), 229 (relating to chemical weapons), subsection (a), (b), (c), or (d) of section 351 (relating to congressional, cabinet, and Supreme Court assassination and kidnaping), 831 (relating to nuclear materials), 832 (relating to participation in nuclear and weapons of mass destruction threats to the United States) 842(m) or (n) (relating to plastic explosives), 844(f)(2) or (3) (relating to arson and bombing of Government property risking or causing death), 844(i) (relating to arson and bombing of property used in interstate commerce), 930(c) (relating to killing or attempted killing during an attack on a Federal facility with a dangerous weapon), 956(a)(1) (relating to conspiracy to murder, kidnap, or maim persons abroad), 1030(a)(1) (relating to protection of computers), 1030(a)(5)(A) resulting in damage as defined in 1030(c)(4)(A)(i)(II) through (VI) (relating to protection of computers), 1114 (relating to killing or attempted killing of officers and employees of the United States), 1116 (relating to murder or manslaughter of foreign officials, official guests, or internationally protected persons), 1203 (relating to hostage taking), 1361 (relating to government property or contracts), 1362 (relating to destruction of communication lines, stations, or systems), 1363 (relating to injury to buildings or property within special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States), 1366(a) (relating to destruction of an energy facility), 1751(a), (b), (c), or (d) (relating to Presidential and Presidential staff assassination and kidnaping), 1992 (relating to terrorist attacks and other acts of violence against railroad carriers and against mass transportation systems on land, on water, or through the air), 2155 (relating to destruction of national defense materials, premises, or utilities), 2156 (relating to national defense material, premises, or utilities), 2280 (relating to violence against maritime navigation), 2280a (relating to maritime safety), 2281 through 2281a (relating to violence against maritime fixed platforms), 2332 (relating to certain homicides and other violence against United States nationals occurring outside of the United States), 2332a (relating to use of weapons of mass destruction), 2332b (relating to acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries), 2332f (relating to bombing of public places and facilities), 2332g (relating to missile systems designed to destroy aircraft), 2332h (relating to radiological dispersal devices), 2332i (relating to acts of nuclear terrorism), 2339 (relating to harboring terrorists), 2339A (relating to providing material support to terrorists), 2339B (relating to providing material support to terrorist organizations), 2339C (relating to financing of terrorism), 2339D (relating to military-type training from a foreign terrorist organization), or 2340A (relating to torture) of this title; (ii) sections 92 (relating to prohibitions governing atomic weapons) or 236 (relating to sabotage of nuclear facilities or fuel) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 ( 42 U.S.C. 2122 or 2284); (iii) section 46502 (relating to aircraft piracy), the second sentence of section 46504 (relating to assault on a flight crew with a dangerous weapon), section 46505(b)(3) or (c) (relating to explosive or incendiary devices, or endangerment of human life by means of weapons, on aircraft), section 46506 if homicide or attempted homicide is involved (relating to application of certain criminal laws to acts on aircraft), or section 60123(b) (relating to destruction of interstate gas or hazardous liquid pipeline facility) of title 49; or (iv) section 1010A of the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (relating to narco-terrorism). The government is basically saying that seditious conspiracy doesn't fall under the specific laws mentioned there, but that the bolded part means they should consider it because of the specifics of the case. Also, the guidelines aren't binding, so they are trying to cover all their bases by saying: - He deserves to be sentenced close to the maximum of what the law allows and the guidelines aren't binding, so you should do that. and - But, even if you did go strictly by the guidelines, we think he would qualify for what we are asking for anyway because their conduct was undeniably "an attempt influence government conduct" and that would qualify for the enhancement, even if the specific charge isn't listed in the federal terrorism statute. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 21:14 on May 7, 2023 |
|
#
¿
May 7, 2023 21:11
|
|
|
Oracle posted:I can see it falling under several of those, namely subsection (a), (b), (c), of section 351, 930(c), 1114, 1203, 1361, 1751 (assuming Pence counts), and probably 2155-56 if you want to be nit picky, given what was in congress’s offices that they had access to and hosed with. Xiahou Dun posted:Yeah a big ol' solid chunk of those seem like they would apply and a bunch of others are at least analogous. Because they weren't convicted of any of those specific crimes. Just seditious conspiracy, obstruction, and assault of a capitol police officer. They weren't charged or accused of kidnapping/murder/attempted murder/manslaughter.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2023 03:22
|
|
|
Jury verdict reached in Trump rape trial: - Jury finds Trump did defame E. Jean Carroll. - Jury finds Trump did sexually assault/abuse E. Jean Carroll. - Jury says that Trump did not rape E. Jean Carroll. - Jury awards Carroll $5 million in damages. https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/05/09/nyregion/trump-carroll-rape-trial-verdict?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 20:24 on May 9, 2023 |
|
#
¿
May 9, 2023 20:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 17:52 |
|
|
Tayter Swift posted:I assume the NYT article is paywalled but the ABC article I'm reading doesn't mention that it was unanimous. Is unanimity required for civil trials? Depends on the state. New York requires at least 5/6ths of a civil jury to reach a verdict in a civil trial.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2023 20:35
|
|