Preparing for Trump's Indictment

Frederick Foresight said:
I understand that part about the law, and it works on paper. But in real life, I think it weighs and potentially sways. So if, based on the evidence, the probability of guilt hangs in the balance, adverse inference may sway it in one direction.
More...


It weighs and sways who in one direction? the media?

trump cannot be convicted based on exercising his constitutional right so without actual evidence, silence from trump proves nothing.

imagine Hillary was served by a trump white house and FBI and she pleaded the 5th because she did not want to be called for questioning before pro trump attorneys or DOJ officials... we would be supporting her right to exercise the 5th...
 
El OchoCinco said:
It weighs and sways who in one direction? the media?

trump cannot be convicted based on exercising his constitutional right so without actual evidence, silence from trump proves nothing.

imagine Hillary was served by a trump white house and FBI and she pleaded the 5th because she did not want to be called for questioning before pro trump attorneys or DOJ officials... we would be supporting her right to exercise the 5th...
More...
You're going by textbook. Doesn't always play that way when there is a judgment call to make.

https://www.litigationandtrial.com/2013/04/articles/attorney/pleading-the-fifth-adverse-inferences/

https://www.gibsondunn.com/wp-conte...-FifthAmendmentCanAndWillBeUsedAgainstYou.pdf

Don't know much about the law. Just throwing it out there.
 
Last edited:
El OchoCinco said:
a defendant has no duty to clarify something if the AG has no direct evidence or proof. that is the whole point of the 5th A. the burden is on the AG not ttump.

gussing why trump invoked the 5th is 100% speculation which is why trump claiming the 5th means nothing. Defendants routinely invoke the 5th amendment because the defense wants to play no part in helping the prsoecution by opening any doors during testimony.

"you think I am guilty? Prove it! I am not required to help you"

If she has direct evidence it will come out and trump invoking the 5th is meaningless. Every good criminal lawyer would tell their defendant to invoke the 5th because the prosecution has all the cards. The only time a defendent would not plead the 5th is if they have direct evidence themselves to clear up the situation, like a defendant has evidence of them not being anywhere near the scene of the crime he is being accused of and wants to come in and give a statement to clear his name. this is very rare.

trump has NO DUTY to clarify anything, that is the point of the constitution. The AG has all the burden to prove its case and the point of the 5th is that the accused has no obligation to help the AG in any way.

the media gets the 5th wrong all the time and so did trump when he claimed "If you are innocent why plead the 5th!" Because the prosecution can be as fucktarded as anything else and the constitution says you are under no obligation to testify. ANy defense lawyer would say plead the 5th and let them prove if they think they have a case. You can always testify if you need to but in most cases you dont because this case is so flimsy.
More...

Couldn't the prosecution use Trump's own words against him here since he opened that can of worms? Typically I'd expect no judge would let the prosecution go w/the tale of "he pled the 5th so he's hiding something!". However, this is different than playing the jury a tape of Trump saying "only mobsters/the guilty plead the fifth". Using his own words to show motive of hiding crimes?
 
Tldr ~6:20 DT fuks himself yet again;

(Legal Eagle has some great content, when you get past the ‘tuber marketing)

Unpacks the legal issues at play without partisan antics.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top