- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Trump Barred From Making Closing Arguments.
Posted on 1/10/24 at 1:56 pm
Posted on 1/10/24 at 1:56 pm
An attorney for Trump informed Judge Arthur Engoron earlier this week that the ex-president wished to speak during the closing arguments and Engoron initially approved the plan, The Associated Press reported.
Now Engoron has rescinded the move, even though Trump is still expected to appear.
LINK
Now Engoron has rescinded the move, even though Trump is still expected to appear.
LINK
This post was edited on 1/10/24 at 2:23 pm
Posted on 1/10/24 at 2:06 pm to ItzMe1972
Since when are you not allowed to speak on your own behalf?
Posted on 1/10/24 at 2:15 pm to ItzMe1972
Best thing that could have happened to Trump.
Not an unusual ruling either, especially if the defendants are separate business entities. They have to be represented by counsel.
Not an unusual ruling either, especially if the defendants are separate business entities. They have to be represented by counsel.
Posted on 1/10/24 at 2:16 pm to ItzMe1972
Insert shoutingatsky.gif
ETA:
ETA:
This post was edited on 1/10/24 at 2:18 pm
Posted on 1/10/24 at 2:24 pm to crap4brain
quote:
Since when are you not allowed to speak on your own behalf?
I'm sure he can testify if he so desires.
Posted on 1/10/24 at 2:26 pm to ItzMe1972
That's not entirely true. Trump was given guidelines on the process and he refused three different times to sign off on it.
Posted on 1/10/24 at 2:31 pm to ItzMe1972
These corrupt commie persecutors need to be held accountable.
18 U.S.C. § 241
Conspiracy Against Rights
Section 241 makes it unlawful for two or more persons to agree to injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in the United States in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States or because of his or her having exercised such a right.
Unlike most conspiracy statutes, §241 does not require, as an element, the commission of an overt act.
The offense is always a felony, even if the underlying conduct would not, on its own, establish a felony violation of another criminal civil rights statute. It is punishable by up to ten years imprisonment unless the government proves an aggravating factor (such as that the offense involved kidnapping aggravated sexual abuse, or resulted in death) in which case it may be punished by up to life imprisonment and, if death results, may be eligible for the death penalty.
Section 241 is used in Law Enforcement Misconduct and Hate Crime Prosecutions. It was historically used, before conspiracy-specific trafficking statutes were adopted, in Human Trafficking prosecutions.
MISCONDUCT BY LAW ENFORCEMENT & OTHER GOVERNMENT ACTORS
18 U.S.C. § 242
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
This provision makes it a crime for someone acting under color of law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. It is not necessary that the offense be motivated by racial bias or by any other animus.
Defendants act under color of law when they wield power vested by a government entity. Those prosecuted under the statute typically include police officers, sheriff’s deputies, and prison guards. However other government actors, such as judges, district attorneys, other public officials, and public school employees can also act under color of law and can be prosecuted under this statute.
Section 242 does not criminalize any particular type of abusive conduct. Instead, it incorporates by reference rights defined by the Constitution, federal statutes, and interpretive case law. Cases charged by federal prosecutors most often involve physical or sexual assaults. The Department has also prosecuted public officials for thefts, false arrests, evidence-planting, and failing to protect someone in custody from constitutional violations committed by others.
A violation of the statute is a misdemeanor, unless prosecutors prove one of the statutory aggravating factors such as a bodily injury, use of a dangerous weapon, kidnapping, aggravated sexual abuse, death resulting, or attempt to kill, in which case there are graduated penalties up to and including life in prison or death. If charged in conjunction with 18 U.S.C. § 250, as noted below, all sexual assaults under color of law are felonies.
18 U.S.C. § 241
Conspiracy Against Rights
Section 241 makes it unlawful for two or more persons to agree to injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in the United States in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States or because of his or her having exercised such a right.
Unlike most conspiracy statutes, §241 does not require, as an element, the commission of an overt act.
The offense is always a felony, even if the underlying conduct would not, on its own, establish a felony violation of another criminal civil rights statute. It is punishable by up to ten years imprisonment unless the government proves an aggravating factor (such as that the offense involved kidnapping aggravated sexual abuse, or resulted in death) in which case it may be punished by up to life imprisonment and, if death results, may be eligible for the death penalty.
Section 241 is used in Law Enforcement Misconduct and Hate Crime Prosecutions. It was historically used, before conspiracy-specific trafficking statutes were adopted, in Human Trafficking prosecutions.
MISCONDUCT BY LAW ENFORCEMENT & OTHER GOVERNMENT ACTORS
18 U.S.C. § 242
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
This provision makes it a crime for someone acting under color of law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. It is not necessary that the offense be motivated by racial bias or by any other animus.
Defendants act under color of law when they wield power vested by a government entity. Those prosecuted under the statute typically include police officers, sheriff’s deputies, and prison guards. However other government actors, such as judges, district attorneys, other public officials, and public school employees can also act under color of law and can be prosecuted under this statute.
Section 242 does not criminalize any particular type of abusive conduct. Instead, it incorporates by reference rights defined by the Constitution, federal statutes, and interpretive case law. Cases charged by federal prosecutors most often involve physical or sexual assaults. The Department has also prosecuted public officials for thefts, false arrests, evidence-planting, and failing to protect someone in custody from constitutional violations committed by others.
A violation of the statute is a misdemeanor, unless prosecutors prove one of the statutory aggravating factors such as a bodily injury, use of a dangerous weapon, kidnapping, aggravated sexual abuse, death resulting, or attempt to kill, in which case there are graduated penalties up to and including life in prison or death. If charged in conjunction with 18 U.S.C. § 250, as noted below, all sexual assaults under color of law are felonies.
Posted on 1/10/24 at 2:33 pm to ItzMe1972
The left make a mockery of this country and everything that made us great. Thing about it is, they don't have a bit of concern of how they come across to the tens of millions who support Trump.
Posted on 1/10/24 at 2:35 pm to teamjackson
quote:
teamjackson
Do you agree or disagree that this judge has been unethical towards Trump?
Posted on 1/10/24 at 2:47 pm to m2pro
quote:
Do you agree or disagree that this judge has been unethical towards Trump?
give him a moment he is searching for another meme or gif to post to your question.
Posted on 1/10/24 at 2:49 pm to ItzMe1972
quote:
Engoron agreed to the move but set boundaries, saying he was inclined to 'let everyone have his or her say.' The judge then said that Trump would have to stick to what attorneys say in closing arguments, which includes 'commentary on the relevant, material facts that are in evidence, and application of the relevant law to those facts.' The former president would not be allowed to 'comment on irrelevant matters' or 'deliver a campaign speech.' He also wouldn't be allowed to criticize the judge, his staff, Attorney General James, her lawyers or the court system, Engoron wrote, according to the AP. Trump's attorney Christopher Kise told Engoron that those limitations were unfair and the ex-president could not agree to them.
Posted on 1/10/24 at 3:00 pm to ItzMe1972
I think the appeal is pretty much locked up now. Should also be able to get a judgment for all legal costs. This is a clown show.
Posted on 1/10/24 at 3:10 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
judge then said that Trump would have to stick to what attorneys say in closing arguments, which includes 'commentary on the relevant, material facts that are in evidence, and application of the relevant law to those facts.' The former president would not be allowed to 'comment on irrelevant matters' or 'deliver a campaign speech.' He also wouldn't be allowed to criticize the judge, his staff, Attorney General James, her lawyers or the court system, Engoron wrote, according to the AP. Trump's attorney Christopher Kise told Engoron that those limitations were unfair and the ex-president could not agree to them.
Seems reasonable. Why does the Cult have a problem with this?
Posted on 1/10/24 at 3:14 pm to boosiebadazz
So he could talk, he just couldn't talk about certain things that would help his case. Got it.
Posted on 1/10/24 at 3:15 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Seems reasonable. Why does the Cult have a problem with this?
Yeah.
Your right, the entire banana republic shite show against Trump has been reasonable.
That entire court system needs to be ridiculed. Karma is a bitch.
Posted on 1/10/24 at 3:15 pm to ItzMe1972
So much for our constitution.
Posted on 1/10/24 at 3:16 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Engoron agreed to the move but set boundaries, saying he was inclined to 'let everyone have his or her say.' The judge then said that Trump would have to stick to what attorneys say in closing arguments, which includes 'commentary on the relevant, material facts that are in evidence, and application of the relevant law to those facts.' The former president would not be allowed to 'comment on irrelevant matters' or 'deliver a campaign speech.' He also wouldn't be allowed to criticize the judge, his staff, Attorney General James, her lawyers or the court system, Engoron wrote, according to the AP. Trump's attorney Christopher Kise told Engoron that those limitations were unfair and the ex-president could not agree to them.
This is literally what any Judge would or should do.
Posted on 1/10/24 at 3:16 pm to Lynxrufus2012
quote:
So much for our constitution.
Posted on 1/10/24 at 3:18 pm to ItzMe1972
Kangaroo court! He should jump when he appears.
Posted on 1/10/24 at 3:18 pm to TDTOM
quote:
So he could talk, he just couldn't talk about certain things that would help his case. Got it.
The judge limited him to what anyone else would be limited to in Closing Argument.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News