Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-08-2016, 04:18 AM
Onomatopoeia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 小浜国
Posts: 6,550

Shouldn't Trump Be Arrested?


IANAL, but with news breaking about Jill Harth, and with Trump on tape gleefully admitting to at the very least sexual harassment, shouldn't he be arrested for sexual misconduct if not sexual assault? What's the law here, and the statute of limitations?

Yes, the tape of Trump verbally demeaning women is disgusting, but what is more disturbing to me is, with his words, he has established that there is a pattern of unacceptable and coercive actions he has taken in his sexual pursuit of women he finds attractive over the years. He didn't say "one time I did X." He said "You know Iím automatically attracted to beautiful women. I just start kissing them. Itís like a magnet. Just kiss. I donít even wait,Ē and ďAnd when youíre a star they let you do it. You can do anything ... Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.Ē

Trump is an absolute pig, but I think the latest revelation, if it can be corroborated by heretofore unknown victims of his unwanted advances, should do more than simply end his chances at the Presidency, it should land his ass in jail.
  #2  
Old 10-08-2016, 04:33 AM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Where haggis roam free
Posts: 31,111
Don't you have a statute of limitations in the US?
  #3  
Old 10-08-2016, 05:03 AM
AK84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 16,457
I don't think he has said anywhere that the actions were not consensual (quite the opposite actually) or that he improperly used a position of power to get consent; it was I "just kiss em, they let me cause I am rich and famous" as opposed to "gimme a blowjob if you want to stay on". (and yes, it would not surprise me if he has done that, but this recording is not this)

He's a Billionaire (yes yes I know ). Scoring chicks is never a problem for them. You think his wives married him for his looks and winning personality?

Last edited by AK84; 10-08-2016 at 05:05 AM.
  #4  
Old 10-08-2016, 06:59 AM
ganthet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 660
There are several issues:

1) Lack of specificity - Trump did not admit to committing any kind of involuntary, non-consensual assault/sexual assault at a given time, place, and on a specific person. Without these details, it is impossible to charge him with a specific crime that took place in the jurisdiction of a particular court.

2) Trump did not admit to doing anything without consent since his assertion was precisely that women would consent to him trying to flirt with, kiss, touch, etc. them because he was famous.

3) Corpus - even if the first two things were not issues and that Trump did admit to touching a woman with a sexual intent and without her permission at a specific time, place, and with a particular woman, there is no independent evidence that this happened (namely a specific woman's statement alleging such an incident that corresponds with the details in his statements).

4) Statute of limitations - again, even assuming that there was an actual admitted assault/sexual assault here, since each state has their own laws establishing separate statutes of limitations, there is no way of telling what the time limitations would be here without knowing the location.

Last edited by ganthet; 10-08-2016 at 07:01 AM.
  #5  
Old 10-08-2016, 08:40 AM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,596
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK84 View Post
I don't think he has said anywhere that the actions were not consensual (quite the opposite actually) or that he improperly used a position of power to get consent; it was I "just kiss em, they let me cause I am rich and famous" as opposed to "gimme a blowjob if you want to stay on". (and yes, it would not surprise me if he has done that, but this recording is not this)

He's a Billionaire (yes yes I know ). Scoring chicks is never a problem for them. You think his wives married him for his looks and winning personality?
Yes, he did. He admits to tricks he does to kiss people, for one. Tricks aren't consensual.
  #6  
Old 10-08-2016, 08:45 AM
AK84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 16,457
I cannot believe I am defending Trump here, but no he did not. Its crass, vulgar and vintage Trump, but nothing in their suggests he did anything unlawful.
  #7  
Old 10-08-2016, 08:56 AM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 85,197
Which law does the OP think Trump has broken? Please be specific and also check statute of limitations. Hint: The recently reviewed video is form 11 years ago.

Now, if we have a real, live woman who steps forward and has an actionable complaint within the last 7 years (typical of SoL), then there might be something.
  #8  
Old 10-08-2016, 09:56 AM
Emtar KronJonDerSohn is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,422
So you're just now realizing he's vulgar and crass?

And I'd be interested to know under which statute in which jurisdiction he might be arrested for "sexual harassment."
  #9  
Old 10-08-2016, 10:19 AM
Onomatopoeia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 小浜国
Posts: 6,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emtar KronJonDerSohn View Post
And I'd be interested to know under which statute in which jurisdiction he might be arrested for "sexual harassment."
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
Which law does the OP think Trump has broken? Please be specific and also check statute of limitations. Hint: The recently reviewed video is form 11 years ago.
Listen you two, I stated that I am not a lawyer, and was asking those here more knowledgable than I what the law and statute of limitations is. If you have answers to my questions fine. If you don't then say so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AK84 View Post
I don't think he has said anywhere that the actions were not consensual (quite the opposite actually) or that he improperly used a position of power to get consent; it was I "just kiss em, they let me cause I am rich and famous" as opposed to "gimme a blowjob if you want to stay on". (and yes, it would not surprise me if he has done that, but this recording is not this)
You're wrong. He specifically stated that he went after Nancy O'Dell "heavy" but she rebuffed him. That certainly does not sound consensual to me. Does that mean he grabbed or groped her? No, but he did say that is something he does.

Also, Jill Harth testified that Trump did do that type of thing to her. Are you going to spin that as somehow consensual as well?

Based on what I have read, and heard from Trump's own mouth, I consider him a sexual predator. Does what he has admitted to rise to the level of criminal activity, I think so, but again, read carefully: I am not a lawyer.
  #10  
Old 10-08-2016, 10:27 AM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 85,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onomatopoeia View Post
Listen you two, I stated that I am not a lawyer, and was asking those here more knowledgable than I what the law and statute of limitations is. If you have answers to my questions fine. If you don't then say so.
Did you read the second part of my post. THE PART YOU LEFT OUT OF YOUR QUOTE??? That answers your question.
  #11  
Old 10-08-2016, 10:29 AM
Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 31,651
Sexual harassment is normally a civil offense not a criminal one. It may rise to the level of a crime in the workplace, but not as a matter of dating.

ganthet already answered the question properly. I can't see anything in the video that rises to a criminal complaint, and that would be true if the tape were made yesterday.
  #12  
Old 10-08-2016, 10:30 AM
Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 11,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
Which law does the OP think Trump has broken? Please be specific and also check statute of limitations. Hint: The recently reviewed video is form 11 years ago.

Now, if we have a real, live woman who steps forward and has an actionable complaint within the last 7 years (typical of SoL), then there might be something.
The OP is asking a question. He's not making a statement as you seem to imply.

ETA: statute of limitations in CA
Sexual offenses against a minor
Before victim
turns 28

Rape
10 years

And discovering who the rapist is via DNA evidence at a later date, may change those.

Last edited by Morgenstern; 10-08-2016 at 10:33 AM.
  #13  
Old 10-08-2016, 10:40 AM
Loach's Avatar
Loach is offline
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 25,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onomatopoeia View Post

You're wrong. He specifically stated that he went after Nancy O'Dell "heavy" but she rebuffed him. That certainly does not sound consensual to me. Does that mean he grabbed or groped her? No, but he did say that is something he does.

Also, Jill Harth testified that Trump did do that type of thing to her. Are you going to spin that as somehow consensual as well?

Based on what I have read, and heard from Trump's own mouth, I consider him a sexual predator. Does what he has admitted to rise to the level of criminal activity, I think so, but again, read carefully: I am not a lawyer.
No he is not wrong. Sexual advances that are rebuffed are not a crime. There have to be some pretty specific (jurisdiction specific) actions for it to rise to a crime. It may be a tort but not a crime.

It was explained to you that it does not rise to the level of a crime especially since he wasn't specifically talking about anyone. In a previous post the term corpus was used. Cops have the saying "No victim no crime."
  #14  
Old 10-08-2016, 10:41 AM
Onomatopoeia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 小浜国
Posts: 6,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
Did you read the second part of my post. THE PART YOU LEFT OUT OF YOUR QUOTE??? That answers your question.
There is no need to become agitated, John. I quoted the part of your post I meant to wherein you asked me for answers to questions I asked in the OP.
  #15  
Old 10-08-2016, 10:46 AM
Onomatopoeia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 小浜国
Posts: 6,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loach View Post
No he is not wrong. Sexual advances that are rebuffed are not a crime. There have to be some pretty specific (jurisdiction specific) actions for it to rise to a crime. It may be a tort but not a crime.
Okay, now I think we are getting somewhere. Thanks. So if what Trump did to Nancy O'Dell was not a crime, which I am okay with stipulating, does that mean it was consensual?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loach View Post
It was explained to you that it does not rise to the level of a crime especially since he wasn't specifically talking about anyone. In a previous post the term corpus was used. Cops have the saying "No victim no crime."
Okay, understood. What about the Jill Harth case?
  #16  
Old 10-08-2016, 10:46 AM
Loach's Avatar
Loach is offline
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 25,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morgenstern View Post
The OP is asking a question. He's not making a statement as you seem to imply.

ETA: statute of limitations in CA
Sexual offenses against a minor
Before victim
turns 28

Rape
10 years

And discovering who the rapist is via DNA evidence at a later date, may change those.
Very different by state. No statute of limitations for sexual assault in NJ.
  #17  
Old 10-08-2016, 10:49 AM
Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 11,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loach View Post
No he is not wrong. Sexual advances that are rebuffed are not a crime. There have to be some pretty specific (jurisdiction specific) actions for it to rise to a crime. It may be a tort but not a crime.

It was explained to you that it does not rise to the level of a crime especially since he wasn't specifically talking about anyone. In a previous post the term corpus was used. Cops have the saying "No victim no crime."
Hold on. I think that needs further explanation. Criminal law (your field), not civil.

What is a sexual advance, is it physical or merely words? (in your jurisdiction if you like) Can Joe grab Jill's crotch one time and stop when she says "no," and not have committed a crime? Does it matter if they are friends or strangers?
  #18  
Old 10-08-2016, 10:49 AM
Corry El is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,896
Quote:
Originally Posted by ganthet View Post
There are several issues:

1) Lack of specificity - Trump did not admit to committing any kind of involuntary, non-consensual assault/sexual assault at a given time, place, and on a specific person. Without these details, it is impossible to charge him with a specific crime that took place in the jurisdiction of a particular court.

2) Trump did not admit to doing anything without consent since his assertion was precisely that women would consent to him trying to flirt with, kiss, touch, etc. them because he was famous.

3) Corpus - even if the first two things were not issues and that Trump did admit to touching a woman with a sexual intent and without her permission at a specific time, place, and with a particular woman, there is no independent evidence that this happened (namely a specific woman's statement alleging such an incident that corresponds with the details in his statements).

4) Statute of limitations - again, even assuming that there was an actual admitted assault/sexual assault here, since each state has their own laws establishing separate statutes of limitations, there is no way of telling what the time limitations would be here without knowing the location.
Yeah, other than that it's a slam dunk prosecution.

Seriously though, it doesn't matter if random people on the internet go overboard with this, that's what the internet is for. But it illustrates the possibility of Democrats overplaying it, which even in their glee the more level headed ones surely realize.

What you have is video, not just audio not just somebody saying so, of Trump crudely speaking of women then getting off the bus and all 'charming' to the woman in the purple dress (IMO that's a serious part of it, rather than just what's said on the bus). Creep. That's really it, good stuff for anti-Trump purposes, but really no need to try to invent some phony criminal aspect.
  #19  
Old 10-08-2016, 10:52 AM
The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 16,752
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase View Post
Sexual harassment is normally a civil offense not a criminal one. It may rise to the level of a crime in the workplace, but not as a matter of dating.
Interestingly, there's a story out now noting that Nancy O'Dell -- the married woman he tried to move on "heavily", the one he "failed" to bed when he "moved on her like a bitch" and so on and so forth -- is somebody he then apparently tried to get fired from hosting the Miss USA pageant back when he owned it.
  #20  
Old 10-08-2016, 10:55 AM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 85,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onomatopoeia View Post
Okay, understood. What about the Jill Harth case?
Here is the SoL law in FL, where the crime allegedly was committed. Looks like it's well past the limit.
  #21  
Old 10-08-2016, 10:58 AM
Onomatopoeia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 小浜国
Posts: 6,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
Here is the SoL law in FL, where the crime allegedly was committed. Looks like it's well past the limit.
Got it. Thanks.
  #22  
Old 10-08-2016, 10:59 AM
Loach's Avatar
Loach is offline
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 25,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onomatopoeia View Post
Okay, now I think we are getting somewhere. Thanks. So if what Trump did to Nancy O'Dell was not a crime, which I am okay with stipulating, does that mean it was consensual?
Okay, understood. What about the Jill Harth case?
Does anyone know how a sexual advance will be received before it happens? When you make whatever your patented move is do you stop and ask consent first? If someone makes an advance and is rebuffed and they stop there is no crime. It may be the tort of sexual harassment.

The Jill Harth case might be a crime but I am not familiar with the law in Florida and especially not familiar with Florida caselaw which is not easily googlable. As I understand it the case was never investigated as a crime and only went forward as a lawsuit.

I have no doubt that Trump at least skirted the line up to assault and is a horrible person. If people want to think of him as a rapist then fine as long as he doesn't get elected.
  #23  
Old 10-08-2016, 11:05 AM
Loach's Avatar
Loach is offline
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 25,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
Here is the SoL law in FL, where the crime allegedly was committed. Looks like it's well past the limit.
The lawsuit happened in 1997. It's not like it wasn't brought up until the SoL ran out. As far as I know she made no attempt to go after him any where but in civil court.

Even if there was no statute of limitations I'm pretty sure these statements would not be admissible in any trial.
  #24  
Old 10-08-2016, 11:19 AM
Onomatopoeia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 小浜国
Posts: 6,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loach View Post
The lawsuit happened in 1997. It's not like it wasn't brought up until the SoL ran out. As far as I know she made no attempt to go after him any where but in civil court.

Even if there was no statute of limitations I'm pretty sure these statements would not be admissible in any trial.
Harth actually did file a sexual harassment suit, which alleged attempted rape, but withdrew the suit as a condition of the $100,000 settlement she said Trump paid her.
  #25  
Old 10-08-2016, 11:22 AM
Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 31,651
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corry El View Post
Seriously though, it doesn't matter if random people on the internet go overboard with this, that's what the internet is for. But it illustrates the possibility of Democrats overplaying it, which even in their glee the more level headed ones surely realize.
Exactly. Let me emphasize this. The Democrats should not imitate Trump. Trump has been spewing out barrels of lying propaganda against both Clintons and calling for at least Hilary's arrest. The Democrats should not copy that behavior. They should stick to facts and official findings - because that's what makes Democrats different from Republicans. It's a good difference and one that needs to be preserved. Trump is offering plenty of rope. No need to invent a new string.

If this sinks Trump, it does so with the usual perversity of politics. We know his personality. Probably nobody on earth aware of him will be truly surprised he said this. Or a hundred other things exactly like this. He has in fact said a hundred things in the same ballpark, not just about women but about every group that isn't his own family. This is a nothing in the larger picture of what we know about Trump. Yet this might be the one thing that sticks when a hundred similar or worse things slide. Nobody has ever figured out why some things get headline news and others just like them are local stories. Stuff just happens. This may be his Dukakis tank moment. Or tomorrow's debate may produce a new outrage that wipes this out of public memory. Nobody knows.
  #26  
Old 10-08-2016, 11:29 AM
Arcite is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 1,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by ganthet View Post
There are several issues:

1) Lack of specificity - Trump did not admit to committing any kind of involuntary, non-consensual assault/sexual assault at a given time, place, and on a specific person. Without these details, it is impossible to charge him with a specific crime that took place in the jurisdiction of a particular court.

2) Trump did not admit to doing anything without consent since his assertion was precisely that women would consent to him trying to flirt with, kiss, touch, etc. them because he was famous.

3) Corpus - even if the first two things were not issues and that Trump did admit to touching a woman with a sexual intent and without her permission at a specific time, place, and with a particular woman, there is no independent evidence that this happened (namely a specific woman's statement alleging such an incident that corresponds with the details in his statements).

4) Statute of limitations - again, even assuming that there was an actual admitted assault/sexual assault here, since each state has their own laws establishing separate statutes of limitations, there is no way of telling what the time limitations would be here without knowing the location.
Good summary.

When I was a kid, I used to wonder--and be outraged by--how so many people were such obvious Bad Guys, even to the extent of admitting in public that they continually broke the law, and were allowed to get away with it. "People talk about these mafia bosses as though everyone knows they're in the mafia," I thought, "why don't the police just go and arrest them?" Rock stars and rap stars repeatedly, openly, even defiantly referenced their own, ongoing use of illegal drugs--why don't the police march right down to their houses and arrest them?

The Real World just doesn't work that way.
  #27  
Old 10-08-2016, 11:38 AM
Loach's Avatar
Loach is offline
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 25,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onomatopoeia View Post
Harth actually did file a sexual harassment suit, which alleged attempted rape, but withdrew the suit as a condition of the $100,000 settlement she said Trump paid her.
Yes I said it was brought up in civil court. What I was trying to say is that this is not a case of someone coming forward with allegations after the statute of limitations ran out. Her allegations came out in time for a criminal investigation but she chose to sue. I don't know why. Maybe advice of counsel.
  #28  
Old 10-08-2016, 11:52 AM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 85,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loach View Post
The lawsuit happened in 1997. It's not like it wasn't brought up until the SoL ran out.
Yes, but we were asked about it's relevance now, which is why I brought up the SoL.
  #29  
Old 10-08-2016, 12:17 PM
Loach's Avatar
Loach is offline
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 25,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
Yes, but we were asked about it's relevance now, which is why I brought up the SoL.
True but even without that I don't think it would be allowed in court. There would be arguments both ways for sure.
  #30  
Old 10-08-2016, 12:22 PM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 85,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loach View Post
True but even without that I don't think it would be allowed in court. There would be arguments both ways for sure.
Are you saying that the DA would probably not be willing to charge Trump with a criminal offense?
  #31  
Old 10-08-2016, 12:26 PM
Loach's Avatar
Loach is offline
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 25,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
Are you saying that the DA would probably not be willing to charge Trump with a criminal offense?
I was doubling back to the OP saying that this recording would not be admissible at trial at a hypothetical Jill Harth case or some other hypothetical victim.
  #32  
Old 10-08-2016, 12:33 PM
boffking is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: New England
Posts: 2,535
He managed to get away with fraud, bribery, violating the Cuban embargo, tax evasion, and inciting violence. I agree that he should be arrested, and you or I would be arrested for these actions. But unfortunately he seems unstoppable, and I doubt he will face legal consequences for this scandal either.
  #33  
Old 10-08-2016, 12:36 PM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 85,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loach View Post
I was doubling back to the OP saying that this recording would not be admissible at trial at a hypothetical Jill Harth case or some other hypothetical victim.
Oh, OK. I didn't get that from your post, but it makes sense now.
  #34  
Old 10-08-2016, 01:17 PM
billfish678 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 16,681
That Hugh Mongus guy on youtube is deep legal shit apparently if he ever runs for president anytime soon.
  #35  
Old 10-08-2016, 01:32 PM
D'Anconia is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,588
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morgenstern View Post
The OP is asking a question. He's not making a statement as you seem to imply.
Just Asking Questions?

There should be a term for that.
  #36  
Old 10-08-2016, 01:35 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Continental Divide
Posts: 5,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loach View Post
Does anyone know how a sexual advance will be received before it happens? When you make whatever your patented move is do you stop and ask consent first? If someone makes an advance and is rebuffed and they stop there is no crime. It may be the tort of sexual harassment.

The Jill Harth case might be a crime but I am not familiar with the law in Florida and especially not familiar with Florida caselaw which is not easily googlable. As I understand it the case was never investigated as a crime and only went forward as a lawsuit.

I have no doubt that Trump at least skirted the line up to assault and is a horrible person. If people want to think of him as a rapist then fine as long as he doesn't get elected.
You could test this, go to a mall, or a public park and walk up to women, kiss them and grab their genitals.

I doubt that you have the budget to buy lawyers but I am betting it will answer you question on if it is illegal or not.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/15/us...hardtdaily.com
  #37  
Old 10-08-2016, 01:35 PM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 23,570
Let me get on the record, again, that I fully expect Donald Trump to be in handcuffs within 3 years. There are too many crimes, too many pissed off people, too many powerful politicians who no longer can stand the man, his goose is literally and effectively cooked.

I'll even go further out in a limb and say it's going to be a RICO indictment: There are too many organizations and too many crimes to prosecute effectively, both operationally (with multiple jurisdictions) and the cost.

Rico is likely the only answer. Otherwise, the Department of Justice, the state of New York, the State of Florida, the FEC, the IRS, and multiple other jurisdictions have to spend their time and money prosecuting Donald Trump in any of his three organizations.

Again, in my admittedly not legal opinion
  #38  
Old 10-08-2016, 03:27 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 22,367
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
Which law does the OP think Trump has broken? Please be specific and also check statute of limitations. Hint: The recently reviewed video is form 11 years ago.

Now, if we have a real, live woman who steps forward and has an actionable complaint within the last 7 years (typical of SoL), then there might be something.
Take your pick. The SoL is expired on some of the sexual assaults though.

http://www.revelist.com/politics/tru...other-crimes/1

https://www.reddit.com/r/EnoughTrump...hy_trump_is_a/
  #39  
Old 10-08-2016, 06:14 PM
Declan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Barrie , Ontario
Posts: 5,434
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
Let me get on the record, again, that I fully expect Donald Trump to be in handcuffs within 3 years. There are too many crimes, too many pissed off people, too many powerful politicians who no longer can stand the man, his goose is literally and effectively cooked.
Or in a few weeks, he is going to be president elect, in which case those same powerful people will line up at the trough. Business is business.

Declan
  #40  
Old 10-08-2016, 06:46 PM
Loach's Avatar
Loach is offline
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 25,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by rat avatar View Post
You could test this, go to a mall, or a public park and walk up to women, kiss them and grab their genitals.

I doubt that you have the budget to buy lawyers but I am betting it will answer you question on if it is illegal or not.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/15/us...hardtdaily.com
Wow I didn't realize that's what Trump did! Your link didn't mention it. I'll go off right now and find the story.

In the mean time I'll just let you know I'm an SVU detective who has been investigating sex crimes for the last six years. I'm always willing to learn more so I'll look forward to your next posts.
  #41  
Old 10-08-2016, 07:26 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 22,367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loach View Post
Wow I didn't realize that's what Trump did! Your link didn't mention it. I'll go off right now and find the story.

In the mean time I'll just let you know I'm an SVU detective who has been investigating sex crimes for the last six years. I'm always willing to learn more so I'll look forward to your next posts.
http://www.snopes.com/2016/06/23/don...-rape-lawsuit/

Quote:
I personally witnessed four sexual encounters that the Plaintiff was forced to have with Mr. Trump during this period, including the fourth of these encounters where Mr. Trump forcibly raped her despite her pleas to stop.

I personally witnessed the one occasion where Mr. Trump forced the Plaintiff and a 12-year-old female named Maria [to] perform oral sex on Mr. Trump and witnessed his physical abuse of both minors when they finished the act.

It was my job to personally witness and supervise encounters between the underage girls that Mr. Epstein hired and his guests.
  #42  
Old 10-08-2016, 07:35 PM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 23,570
Quote:
Originally Posted by Declan View Post
Or in a few weeks, he is going to be president elect, in which case those same powerful people will line up at the trough. Business is business.

Declan
Naw, he isn't going to win. Hillary's ground game and his own party will make sure of that. The RNC has suspended campaign activities for Trump, and he was depending upon them to GOTV. And people are already voting!

Last edited by JohnT; 10-08-2016 at 07:36 PM.
  #43  
Old 10-08-2016, 07:58 PM
Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 11,866
I've watched the Trump supporters spin this story so many ways it's pathetic. A decade ago, that's not who he is, boys in a locker room. For craps sake people, it IS who he is, it's who he's been for a long time. It's who he'll be for the rest of his life.

If he thought he could kiss and grope women when he was a star, what do you think he'll think he can do to women as POTUS?

We had a jerk like this as mayor of San Diego a few years back. He thought being the mayor gave him the right to sexually harass women. The law disagreed, and the city paid out a lot of money in settlements for what he did to the women. Everyone loses when a jerkwad can't keep his hands to himself.
  #44  
Old 10-08-2016, 07:58 PM
Loach's Avatar
Loach is offline
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 25,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
Yes I was aware there is a lawsuit but at this time there is as much proof that it happened as there is for the Anita Broderick case. If it is true then it would of course be a crime.
  #45  
Old 10-08-2016, 08:01 PM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 23,570
"70yo admits 60yo self was crude, assures he has matured since then."
  #46  
Old 10-08-2016, 08:03 PM
Loach's Avatar
Loach is offline
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 25,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
Naw, he isn't going to win. Hillary's ground game and his own party will make sure of that. The RNC has suspended campaign activities for Trump, and he was depending upon them to GOTV. And people are already voting!
It certainly looks now like he won't win. There are plenty of people who have made their mind up about him that won't change but not enough to win. Hopefully no October surprises coming out on the other end to swing things back.
  #47  
Old 10-08-2016, 08:03 PM
Loach's Avatar
Loach is offline
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 25,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
"70yo admits 60yo self was crude, assures he has matured since then."
Brilliant
  #48  
Old 10-08-2016, 08:31 PM
Tim@T-Bonham.net is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 15,038
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loach View Post
Yes I said it was brought up in civil court. What I was trying to say is that this is not a case of someone coming forward with allegations after the statute of limitations ran out. Her allegations came out in time for a criminal investigation but she chose to sue. I don't know why. Maybe advice of counsel.
"she chose to sue" because that is all she could do on her own.

Criminal prosecutions are done by the County Attorney, not individuals. And County Attorneys are elected, and need contributions from rich, powerful men to run their campaigns. So they tend to be hesitant about indicting them. Especially when the only evidence is the word of a young woman.

Nothing surprising about this,
  #49  
Old 10-08-2016, 08:35 PM
purplehearingaid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,837
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/09/trump...dangerous.html



Yeah I think he should had been arrested for saying against Hillary !
  #50  
Old 10-08-2016, 08:54 PM
Loach's Avatar
Loach is offline
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 25,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by t-bonham@scc.net View Post
"she chose to sue" because that is all she could do on her own.

Criminal prosecutions are done by the County Attorney, not individuals. And County Attorneys are elected, and need contributions from rich, powerful men to run their campaigns. So they tend to be hesitant about indicting them. Especially when the only evidence is the word of a young woman.

Nothing surprising about this,
Cite?

The prosecutor wouldn't have a chance to make that determination if there wasn't a police report or further investigation. Did she try? I haven't seen anything about it but I don't know one way or the other. If she did attempt and it didn't go anywhere you could form an opinion about it even without facts. But if she didn't attempt to go that route then yes she chose to sue.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:03 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017