DC - Former President Donald Trump indicted, 4 federal counts in 2020 election interference, 1 Aug 2023, Trial 4 Mar 2024

[Niner]

Docket update:

Doc # Date Filed Description
40 Aug 29, 2023 LEAVE TO FILE DENIED-Motion of D.A. Feliciano for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief Supporting Neither Plaintiff Nor Defendant as to DONALD J. TRUMP. "This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. Although Courts have in rare instances exercised their discretion to permit third-party submissions in criminal cases, neither the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures nor the Local Rules contemplate the filing of amicus curiae briefs. At this time, the court does not find it necessary to depart from the ordinary procedures course by permitting this filing". Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/21/2023. (zhsj) (Entered: 08/29/2023)
Leave to File Denied

41 Aug 29, 2023 LEAVE TO FILE DENIED- Motion for Judicial Notice Affidavit of Victor Shorkin as to DONALD J. TRUMP. This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. "This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. Although Courts have in rare instances exercised their discretion to permit third-party submissions in criminal cases, neither the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures nor the Local Rules contemplate the filing of amicus curiae briefs. At this time, the court does not find it necessary to depart from the ordinary procedures course by permitting this filing". Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/21/2023. (zhsj) (Entered: 08/29/2023)
Leave to File Denied

42 Aug 29, 2023 LEAVE TO FILE DENIED-Motion to Intervene as to DONALD J. TRUMP This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. "This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. Although Courts have in rare instances exercised their discretion to permit third-party submissions in criminal cases, neither the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures nor the Local Rules contemplate the filing of amicus curiae briefs. At this time, the court does not find it necessary to depart from the ordinary procedures course by permitting this filing". Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/21/2023. (zhsj) (Entered: 08/29/2023)
Leave to File Denied

43 Aug 29, 2023 LEAVE TO FILE DENIED-Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus as to DONALD J. TRUMP This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. "This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. Although Courts have in rare instances exercised their discretion to permit third-party submissions in criminal cases, neither the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures nor the Local Rules contemplate the filing of amicus curiae briefs. At this time, the court does not find it necessary to depart from the ordinary procedures course by permitting this filing".. Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/21/2023. (zhsj) (Entered: 08/29/2023)
Leave to File Denied

44 Aug 29, 2023 LEAVE TO FILE DENIED- Galaxy Bar Association as to DONALD J. TRUMP This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. "This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. Although Courts have in rare instances exercised their discretion to permit third-party submissions in criminal cases, neither the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures nor the Local Rules contemplate the filing of amicus curiae briefs. At this time, the court does not find it necessary to depart from the ordinary procedures course by permitting this filing". Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/21/2023. (zhsj) (Entered: 08/29/2023)
Leave to File Denied

45 Aug 29, 2023 LEAVE TO FILE DENIED- Amicus Curiae in Support of Donald Trump as to DONALD J. TRUMP This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. "This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. Although Courts have in rare instances exercised their discretion to permit third-party submissions in criminal cases, neither the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures nor the Local Rules contemplate the filing of amicus curiae briefs. At this time, the court does not find it necessary to depart from the ordinary procedures course by permitting this filing". Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/21/2023. (zhsj) (Entered: 08/29/2023)
Leave to File Denied

46 Aug 29, 2023 LEAVE TO FILE DENIED- Motion of Former Judges and Senior Legal Officials for Leave to File an Amicus Curiae Brief in Support of Government Proposed Trial Date and Schedule as to DONALD J. TRUMP This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. "This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. Although Courts have in rare instances exercised their discretion to permit third-party submissions in criminal cases, neither the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures nor the Local Rules contemplate the filing of amicus curiae briefs. At this time, the court does not find it necessary to depart from the ordinary procedures course by permitting this filing". Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/21/2023. (zhsj) (Entered: 08/29/2023)
Leave to File Denied


link: United States v. TRUMP, 1:23-cr-00257 - CourtListener.com

 

[Niner]

Anyone find a next hearing for this case? On my hearing/schedule for this case is below. Nothing really for the next hearing date, just what needs to be filed by.
TIA - if someone kind find something!

August 28, 2023 @ 10am: Status Conference hearing
10/9/23: All other pretrial motions, excluding motions in limine shall be filed on or before.

10/23/23: All oppositions shall be due.

11/6/23: Replies shall be due.

12/4/23: Fed. R. Evid. 404(B) Notice no later than. The government shall provide notice of evidence it intends to offer pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 404(b).

12/11/23: Parties shall disclose any expert witnesses & file a brief description of each witness' area of expertise & expected testimony by this date.

12/18/23: The parties shall exchange lists of exhibits they intend to use in their cases in chief by this date.

12/27/23: All Motions in Limine & motions to suppress statements or tangible things shall be filed shall be filed on, or before.

1/3/24: The parties shall file objections to exhibits by this date.

1/9/24: Exhibits lists replies shall be due by this date.

1/9/24: Oppositions to Motions in Limine shall be filed no later than.

1/15/24: Voir Dire/Proposed jury instructions: Counsel shall jointly submit both a short narrative description of the case, to be read to the prospective jurors, and proposed voir dire questions on or before.

1/22/24: All Motions in Limine replies shall be due. The court will schedule a hearing on the motion(s) as necessary.

2/12/24: The Government must disclose information that may be useful for impeachment or may otherwise affect the credibility of any Government witness (Giglio)—including Lewis material—on or before.

2/19/24: The parties shall exchange lists of witnesses in their cases in chief by this date.

The court will discuss its jury selection procedures at a later status hearings.

Monday, March 4, 2024 – Jury selection to begin @ 9:30am.

 

[Inthedetails]

Docket update:

Doc # Date Filed Description
40 Aug 29, 2023 LEAVE TO FILE DENIED-Motion of D.A. Feliciano for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief Supporting Neither Plaintiff Nor Defendant as to DONALD J. TRUMP. "This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. Although Courts have in rare instances exercised their discretion to permit third-party submissions in criminal cases, neither the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures nor the Local Rules contemplate the filing of amicus curiae briefs. At this time, the court does not find it necessary to depart from the ordinary procedures course by permitting this filing". Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/21/2023. (zhsj) (Entered: 08/29/2023)
Leave to File Denied

41 Aug 29, 2023 LEAVE TO FILE DENIED- Motion for Judicial Notice Affidavit of Victor Shorkin as to DONALD J. TRUMP. This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. "This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. Although Courts have in rare instances exercised their discretion to permit third-party submissions in criminal cases, neither the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures nor the Local Rules contemplate the filing of amicus curiae briefs. At this time, the court does not find it necessary to depart from the ordinary procedures course by permitting this filing". Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/21/2023. (zhsj) (Entered: 08/29/2023)
Leave to File Denied

42 Aug 29, 2023 LEAVE TO FILE DENIED-Motion to Intervene as to DONALD J. TRUMP This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. "This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. Although Courts have in rare instances exercised their discretion to permit third-party submissions in criminal cases, neither the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures nor the Local Rules contemplate the filing of amicus curiae briefs. At this time, the court does not find it necessary to depart from the ordinary procedures course by permitting this filing". Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/21/2023. (zhsj) (Entered: 08/29/2023)
Leave to File Denied

43 Aug 29, 2023 LEAVE TO FILE DENIED-Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus as to DONALD J. TRUMP This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. "This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. Although Courts have in rare instances exercised their discretion to permit third-party submissions in criminal cases, neither the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures nor the Local Rules contemplate the filing of amicus curiae briefs. At this time, the court does not find it necessary to depart from the ordinary procedures course by permitting this filing".. Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/21/2023. (zhsj) (Entered: 08/29/2023)
Leave to File Denied

44 Aug 29, 2023 LEAVE TO FILE DENIED- Galaxy Bar Association as to DONALD J. TRUMP This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. "This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. Although Courts have in rare instances exercised their discretion to permit third-party submissions in criminal cases, neither the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures nor the Local Rules contemplate the filing of amicus curiae briefs. At this time, the court does not find it necessary to depart from the ordinary procedures course by permitting this filing". Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/21/2023. (zhsj) (Entered: 08/29/2023)
Leave to File Denied

45 Aug 29, 2023 LEAVE TO FILE DENIED- Amicus Curiae in Support of Donald Trump as to DONALD J. TRUMP This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. "This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. Although Courts have in rare instances exercised their discretion to permit third-party submissions in criminal cases, neither the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures nor the Local Rules contemplate the filing of amicus curiae briefs. At this time, the court does not find it necessary to depart from the ordinary procedures course by permitting this filing". Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/21/2023. (zhsj) (Entered: 08/29/2023)
Leave to File Denied

46 Aug 29, 2023 LEAVE TO FILE DENIED- Motion of Former Judges and Senior Legal Officials for Leave to File an Amicus Curiae Brief in Support of Government Proposed Trial Date and Schedule as to DONALD J. TRUMP This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. "This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. Although Courts have in rare instances exercised their discretion to permit third-party submissions in criminal cases, neither the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures nor the Local Rules contemplate the filing of amicus curiae briefs. At this time, the court does not find it necessary to depart from the ordinary procedures course by permitting this filing". Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 8/21/2023. (zhsj) (Entered: 08/29/2023)
Leave to File Denied


link: United States v. TRUMP, 1:23-cr-00257 - CourtListener.com

Who are these people/entities and what is their intention?? tia for any insights!

jmo

 

[Niner]

Who are these people/entities and what is their intention?? tia for any insights!

jmo

I have no idea! LOL!

Some kind of third-party it says at the end of all those denials.

 

[Inthedetails]

I have no idea! LOL!

Some kind of third-party it says at the end of all those denials.

I'll just file them in my brain under "busybodies," until we know otherwise.

jmo

 

[Inthedetails]

WNYC is now reading the indictment, page by page. It's in progress, but I'm assuming you can listen from the start later when the segment is completed. It's on the Brian Lehrer Show:

WNYC | New York Public Radio, Podcasts, Live Streaming Radio, News

WNYC is America's most listened-to public radio station and the producer of award-winning programs and podcasts like Radiolab, On the Media, and The Brian Lehrer Show.

www.wnyc.org

Correction: they are not reading the entire indictment but sections

 

[Niner]

I have no idea! LOL!

Some kind of third-party it says at the end of all those denials.

I'll just file them in my brain under "busybodies," until we know otherwise.

jmo

I just looked at the court site - and they have deleted all these denies - from 40 to 46. It now ends with entry 39. Still no next hearing date though.

Anyone hear of one? TIA if you do!

 

[BritsKate]

Questions asked of two recent witnesses indicate Smith is focusing on how money raised off baseless claims of voter fraud was used to fund attempts to breach voting equipment in several states won by Joe Biden, according to multiple sources familiar with the ongoing investigation.
In both interviews, prosecutors have focused their questions on the role of former Trump lawyer Sidney Powell.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/05/politics/special-counsel-election-probe-continues-fundraising-voting-equipment-breaches-sidney-powell/index.html

And a resource link should Niner need a vacation in the next couple of years:

Master Calendar of Trump Court Dates: Criminal and Civil Cases

Tracking the legal and political milestones in former President Trump's busy 2023-2024 court and campaign calendar.

www.justsecurity.org

 

[sds71]

GOVERNMENT’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO VACATE


Such a requirement would grind litigation in this case to a halt, which is particularly infeasible given the pressing matters before the Court—including the defendant’s daily extrajudicial statements that threaten to prejudice the jury pool in this case, as described in the Government’s motion. See ECF No. 47-3. The Court should deny the defendant’s motion.

Jack Smith

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148.49.0.pdf

 

[Lilibet]

GOVERNMENT’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO VACATE


Such a requirement would grind litigation in this case to a halt, which is particularly infeasible given the pressing matters before the Court—including the defendant’s daily extrajudicial statements that threaten to prejudice the jury pool in this case, as described in the Government’s motion. See ECF No. 47-3. The Court should deny the defendant’s motion.

Jack Smith

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148.49.0.pdf

Same from CNN…

https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/05/politics/jack-smith-trump-statements-prejudice-jury-pool/index.html

CNN —
Special counsel Jack Smith said in a court filing Tuesday that former President Donald Trump has made “daily extrajudicial statements that threaten to prejudice the jury pool” in the 2020 election subversion case.

The allegation arose in a court fight that remains largely under seal, so additional details are not public. The brief reference to Trump’s statements affecting the jury pool at the Washington, DC, courthouse came in a public filing in the federal criminal case.

 

[MyBelle]

GOVERNMENT’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO VACATE


Such a requirement would grind litigation in this case to a halt, which is particularly infeasible given the pressing matters before the Court—including the defendant’s daily extrajudicial statements that threaten to prejudice the jury pool in this case, as described in the Government’s motion. See ECF No. 47-3. The Court should deny the defendant’s motion.

Jack Smith

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148.49.0.pdf

BBM. I think this is the first time I've heard a prosecutor express worry that a defendant's statements would "prejudice" the jury pool before trial even gets started. I guess the concept of 'innocent until proven guilty' only works for defendants who are not politicians. smh

JMO

 

[Inthedetails]

BBM. I think this is the first time I've heard a prosecutor express worry that a defendant's statements would "prejudice" the jury pool before trial even gets started. I guess the concept of 'innocent until proven guilty' only works for defendants who are not politicians. smh

JMO

Most defendants don't have a huge public platform to use to attempt to prejudice a jury pool. This defendant does.

jmo

 

[MyBelle]

Most defendants don't have a huge public platform to use to attempt to prejudice a jury pool. This defendant does.

jmo

All defendants enjoy freedom of speech but the Judge in this case also has made it clear what is and isn't permitted. The prosecution still has the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I think it will be very difficult to seat a jury in this case because they all will have some bias one way or the other.

JMO

 

[BritsKate]

BBM. I think this is the first time I've heard a prosecutor express worry that a defendant's statements would "prejudice" the jury pool before trial even gets started. I guess the concept of 'innocent until proven guilty' only works for defendants who are not politicians. smh

JMO

Gag orders are pretty commonplace in high profile prosecutions, even pre-trial, so it's evident it's been a concern for other prosecutors. Special protections are often necessary in high profile cases because of increased media coverage.

And simply for the purpose of balance, I'll point out that sometimes prosecutors are gagged too due to public commentary potentially jeopardizing a trial. It's cuts both ways and the judge's top priority has to be ensuring the defendant is afforded a fair trial.

All defendants enjoy freedom of speech but the Judge in this case also has made it clear what is and isn't permitted. The prosecution still has the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I think it will be very difficult to seat a jury in this case because they all will have some bias one way or the other.

JMO

A defendant's first amendment rights are not absolute though because of the need to balance those rights with the right to a fair trial though. I actually don't think it'll be hard to seat a jury - lots of folks don't closely follow politics - and the question will be whether they can be impartial and evaluate the evidence before them to render a verdict.
----------
I'm still of the mind that Trump is deliberately attempting to provoke Judge Chutkan into a gag order so he can decry his rights are being violated; he's being held to a different standard, etc. I think it's inevitable.

All JMO

 

[Niner]

Docket update:

Doc# Date Filed Description
48 Sep 5, 2023 MOTION to Vacate by DONALD J. TRUMP. (Lauro, John) (Entered: 09/05/2023)
Vacate

49 Sep 5, 2023 Memorandum in Opposition by USA as to DONALD J. TRUMP re 48 Motion to Vacate (Gaston, Molly) (Entered: 09/05/2023)
Memorandum in Opposition

Sep 5, 2023 VACATED PURSUANT TO MINUTE ORDER FILED 9/5/2023.....MINUTE ORDER as to DONALD J. TRUMP: The Government's 47 Motion for Leave to File Unredacted Motion Under Seal, and to File Redacted Motion on Public Docket is hereby GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to file under seal the unredacted copy of the Government's Motion (ECF No. 47-1), attaching Exhibit 1 to the Government's Motion (ECF No. 47-2). The Clerk of the Court is further directed to file on the public docket the redacted copy of the Government's Motion (ECF No. 47-3), attaching a placeholder sheet for Exhibit 1 to the Motion (ECF No. 47-4), and the two proposed orders referenced in the Motion (ECF Nos. 47-5 and 47-6). Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 9/5/2023. (zjd) Modified on 9/5/2023 (zjd).

Sep 5, 2023 MINUTE ORDER as to DONALD J. TRUMP: The Government's 47 Motion for Leave to File Unredacted Motion Under Seal, and to File Redacted Motion on Public Docket is hereby GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to file under seal the unredacted copy of the Government's Motion (ECF No. 47-1), attaching Exhibit 1 to the Government's Motion (ECF No. 47-2). The Clerk of the Court is further directed to file on the public docket the redacted copy of the Government's Motion (ECF No. 47-3), attaching a placeholder sheet for Exhibit 1 to the Motion (ECF No. 47-4), and the two proposed orders referenced in the Motion (ECF Nos. 47-5 and 47-6). Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 9/5/2023. (zjd)

Sep 5, 2023 Order on Sealed Motion for Leave to File Document Under Seal

Sep 5, 2023 Order on Motion to Vacate AND Set/Reset Deadlines

Sep 5, 2023 MINUTE ORDER as to DONALD J. TRUMP: Defendant's 48 Motion to Vacate is hereby GRANTED. The court's previous Minute Order of September 5, 2023 is VACATED. Defendant shall respond to the government's 47 Motion for Leave to File by September 11, 2023; the government may file a Reply by September 13, 2023. Any opposition or reply may be filed under seal. Going forward, all motions, including motions for leave to file, must (1) indicate whether the movant has conferred with opposing counsel, and (2) state the nonmovant's position on the motion, if known. As it has done here, the court may require briefing on motions for leave to file under seal on a timeline shorter than the default periods provided for in the Local Criminal Rules. However, all such briefing may be filed under seal without further order of the court. Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 9/5/2023. (zjd)

link: United States v. TRUMP, 1:23-cr-00257 - CourtListener.com



Nothing about the next hearing...

 

[Inthedetails]

I'm still of the mind that Trump is deliberately attempting to provoke Judge Chutkan into a gag order so he can decry his rights are being violated; he's being held to a different standard, etc. I think it's inevitable.

All JMO

snipped

I totally agree. And I think he's intimidating witnesses - he does not hold back and WILL attack people when it benefits him. Think of Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, for example.

I shouldn't be surprised when people can't won't see fault in him, but I continually am surprised nonetheless. Exercising first-amendment rights doesn't mean he is truthful or honorable when he talks or tweets.

jmo

 

[Lilibet]

I actually don't think it'll be hard to seat a jury - lots of folks don't closely follow politics - and the question will be whether they can be impartial and evaluate the evidence before them to render a verdict.

I find the whole schtick about it being difficult to seat a jury because they are biased one way or another to be so very insulting to the jury system and to those citizens who serve on juries. Those who can’t overcome their bias are weeded out by various means and the vast majority are able to be impartial. Even though I know a lot about this case, I could sit on Trump’s jury and focus only on the evidence presented and leave my feelings at the door…because it would be disrespectful to the defendant and to the justice system to do otherwise. I have principles and I trust that the chosen jurors do also. But just as it suited the defendant to undermine the election system to try to gain an advantage, he will do the same to the justice system, undermining the jurors and witnesses ahead of time to delegitimize an adverse verdict.

JMO

 

[BritsKate]

snipped

I totally agree. And I think he's intimidating witnesses - he does not hold back and WILL attack people when it benefits him. Think of Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, for example.

I shouldn't be surprised when people can't won't see fault in him, but I continually am surprised nonetheless. Exercising first-amendment rights doesn't mean he is truthful or honorable when he talks or tweets.

jmo

As egregious as his conduct towards Shaye and Ruby was - remember he also actually posted that Geoff Duncan shouldn't testify in Georgia too. If that's not literal witness tampering I don't know what would qualify.

I actually believe the first amendment may well be the most misunderstood right. And I honestly think it's deliverately manipulated by a lot of folks who simply want there to be no consequences for ANY speech. Thread relevant article, with apologies if it's already been posted:

“The fact that he is running a political campaign … must yield to the orderly administration of justice … If that means he can’t say exactly what he wants to say about witnesses in this case,” the judge declared, “then that’s how it’s going to be”.

Her warnings echo the supreme court’s broad teaching in the 1966 case of Sheppard v Maxwell. There, the court made clear that rights derived from the first amendment “must not be allowed to divert the trial from the very purpose of a court system . . .” including “the requirement that the jury’s verdict be based on evidence received in open court, not from outside sources”.

To ensure “the purpose of the court system”, Judge Chutkan did what is normal in cases of significant media interest and cases where there are risks to witnesses or of publicly disclosed grand jury material tainting the jury pool. She issued a protective order.

By the order, Trump has been specifically told that he may not publicly discuss materials that the government designates as “sensitive”. They will include witness’s private identifying information, transcripts of their interviews and grand jury testimony.

The supreme court has said that where good cause for a protective order exists, it “does not offend the first amendment.”

Trump has no serious first amendment defense in a court of law. Here’s why | Laurence H Tribe and Dennis Aftergut

Words that criminal defendants have written or spoken are used against them all the time. Perhaps you’ve heard of a confession?

www.theguardian.com

I find the whole schtick about it being difficult to seat a jury because they are biased one way or another to be so very insulting to the jury system and to those citizens who serve on juries. Those who can’t overcome their bias are weeded out by various means and the vast majority are able to be impartial. Even though I know a lot about this case, I could sit on Trump’s jury and focus only on the evidence presented and leave my feelings at the door…because it would be disrespectful to the defendant and to the justice system to do otherwise. I have principles and I trust that the chosen jurors do also. But just as it suited the defendant to undermine the election system to try to gain an advantage, he will do the same to the justice system, undermining the jurors and witnesses ahead of time to delegitimize an adverse verdict.

JMO

You're a much better human than me. I'd have his malignantly narcissistic self in solitary at Gitmo before he even made an initial appearance which is why I'd be banned from going near the courtroom.

Seriously though, you're absolutely spot on. The issue is not a juror's bias because every human being will have biases but rather if they can set those aside to do what the criminal justice system entrusts them to. And people like me would be excluded through the likely questionnaire and voir dire process. JMO

 

[Inthedetails]

As egregious as his conduct towards Shaye and Ruby was - remember he also actually posted that Geoff Duncan shouldn't testify in Georgia too. If that's not literal witness tampering I don't know what would qualify.

I actually believe the first amendment may well be the most misunderstood right. And I honestly think it's deliverately manipulated by a lot of folks who simply want there to be no consequences for ANY speech. Thread relevant article, with apologies if it's already been posted:

Trump has no serious first amendment defense in a court of law. Here’s why | Laurence H Tribe and Dennis Aftergut

Words that criminal defendants have written or spoken are used against them all the time. Perhaps you’ve heard of a confession?

www.theguardian.com

You're a much better human than me. I'd have his malignantly narcissistic self in solitary at Gitmo before he even made an initial appearance which is why I'd be banned from going near the courtroom.

Seriously though, you're absolutely spot on. The issue is not a juror's bias because every human being will have biases but rather if they can set those aside to do what the criminal justice system entrusts them to. And people like me would be excluded through the likely questionnaire and voir dire process. JMO

And the point made above that not everyone is following politics or crime is spot on. I'm not worried about finding a jury who can judge by the facts but I am concerned about finding jury members willing to put up with the circus these trials will be. jmo

 

[BritsKate]

And the point made above that not everyone is following politics or crime is spot on. I'm not worried about finding a jury who can judge by the facts but I am concerned about finding jury members willing to put up with the circus these trials will be. jmo

That's my concern too - and the length of the trial because it's hard to imagine a jury in a case this high profile and of this magnitude won't need to be sequestered.

I don't envy this future jury. I think it's going to be a grueling trial. JMO