Current Affairs Donald Trump POS: Judgement cometh and that right soon

Status
Not open for further replies.
Martin Alvito said:
Deliberations reaching day two is not a good sign. It could mean that they're splitting the charges. We'll have to watch what questions they ask the judge as they go. What we have, on the request to rehear testimony, suggests any holdout or holdouts are at least persuadable.
Click to expand...
I was reading that jail time is unlikely anyway unless he's found guilty on all counts because, a) it's a non-violent crime, and b) he's a first offender.
 
PhilM said:
I was reading that jail time is unlikely anyway unless he's found guilty on all counts because, a) it's a non-violent crime, and b) he's a first offender.
Click to expand...
That's not usually how it works on dozens of felonies, even for first offenders convicted of the non-violent variety with a relatively low max sentence. It can work that way, depending on the case and the judge. Any jail time would probably be concurrent, yes, so it would be limited. He's not looking at SBF jail time.

It probably comes down to Merchan balancing two things. On the one hand, Trump is a major party candidate for president. Jail time represents Merchan putting a thumb on that scale. Against that, Trump has been as antagonistic as a defendant gets. Merchan could decide that sending a message about the rule of law and at least feigning respect for the court system is necessary.

As @COYBL25 points out, there could be pressure not to hand out jail time. However, a New York state judge is hard to pressure. They're directly elected every two years, and slapping Trump with a max sentence would more or less guarantee re-election for all time in his Democratic district.

So it comes down to Merchan, which is why sane people do not antagonize the judge.
 
Martin Alvito said:
That's not usually how it works on dozens of felonies, even for first offenders convicted of the non-violent variety with a relatively low max sentence. It can work that way, depending on the case and the judge. Any jail time would probably be concurrent, yes, so it would be limited. He's not looking at SBF jail time.

It probably comes down to Merchan balancing two things. On the one hand, Trump is a major party candidate for president. Jail time represents Merchan putting a thumb on that scale. Against that, Trump has been as antagonistic as a defendant gets. Merchan could decide that sending a message about the rule of law and at least feigning respect for the court system is necessary.

As @COYBL25 points out, there could be pressure not to hand out jail time. However, a New York state judge is hard to pressure. They're directly elected every two years, and slapping Trump with a max sentence would more or less guarantee re-election for all time in his Democratic district.

So it comes down to Merchan, which is why sane people do not antagonize the judge.
Click to expand...
In the back of my mind, I did question the suggestion, yet it was reported in the Times (I think) so you'd hope its perspective would be at least based on experience.

But as I know the US legal system can be a warren of different and sometimes conflicting state and federal crimes, I have no idea what would be applied.

The BBC have today reported, however:

"It is a non-violent offence. It's the lowest of the [felony] offences," said former Brooklyn prosecutor Julie Rendelman. "With no record, his age, you name it, it would be highly unlikely."
Click to expand...

In the UK, the most similar conviction I can think of mostly equates to a fine, with imprisonment up to twelve months. The likelihood of the latter though is slim.

Although contrasting that, fraud causes or those with financial malfeasance often come with quite stern periods to be held at His Majesty's pleasure.
 
PhilM said:
In the back of my mind, I did question the suggestion, yet it was reported in the Times (I think) so you'd hope its perspective would be at least based on experience.

But as I know the US legal system can be a warren of different and sometimes conflicting state and federal crimes, I have no idea what would be applied.

The BBC have today reported, however:



In the UK, the most similar conviction I can think of mostly equates to a fine, with imprisonment up to twelve months. The likelihood of the latter though is slim.

Although contrasting that, fraud causes or those with financial malfeasance often come with quite stern periods to be held at His Majesty's pleasure.
Click to expand...
Max sentence is four years. Flying blind without data (and there won't be a ton of low-level felony, oodles of counts cases), I would guess that the median sentence handed out on a case like this is six months.

I would imagine the media is privy to better data. The US outlets I'm seeing are being a bit more cautious in predictions. Merchan is not known for harsh sentences, and wealthy, famous defendants do tend to make out better in a sentencing hearing. However, I would also argue that they usually benefit from better representation than Trump can hire, given his history with attorneys.

What Merchan thinks about intent also matters. Our state and federal courts don't like fraud either, and one reason SBF got nailed to the wall even though his victims probably get made whole is intent.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top