I don’t think Rudy could possibly get a deal where he walks, but at his age, any reduction in his sentence is a potential lifeline. And I think Trump’s personal attorney on the stand, revealing all the dirt (corroborated elsewhere) could be tremendously impactful and persuasive. Not in MAGAworld, of course, but in a court of law, with objective jurors.
Just a thought.
The prosecution doesn’t want Rudy as a cooperating witness. He is useless to their case, because Trump’s team can impeach his “truthful” testimony by pointing to all the times he’s lied recently, babbled incoherently, or drunkenly, or otherwise made a fool out of himself in public.
Besides that, he’s facing a few decades in prison. At 79, does it matter if you’re facing 30 years or 10? You’ll be dead long before your time is served either way, and they ain’t going to reduce his sentence to 0 for some testimony that they already have documentary evidence of and that can be easily impeached.
Rudy is screwed.
I agree.
It’s like if you have a case where you have video of a guy selling meth on the corner, a bag of meth with his prints on it, and a note signed by the guy saying “I have meth for sale”.
You don’t need to put one of his meth-head clients who is a known liar on the stand to swear he bought meth from him.
Yeah, makes sense. I withdraw my objection, Your Honor!
It’s important to look on the bright side occasionally.
While I don’t want it seem like I’m defending the asshole, I personally know people that worked for him and got paid.
His reputation is that he looks for any excuse he can find not to pay his contractors, and he’s notorious for doing things like insisting on his contractors using the cheapest materials available and refusing to pay because they don’t perform like quality materials, but if he can’t find a good excuse, he’ll pay the bill.
I never worked directly for him, but I sold a lighting and shade automation system through his in-house contractor at one of his NYC buildings.
Early in the job, they managed to screw me out of about $1000 due to some poor wording in my contract.
But they also screwed their client (the owner of the apartment) by not purchasing and installing all the lights and shades and control points specified on the plan. Which means I only had to provide enough equipment to control what was actually installed, which was considerably less than what was on the plan…and in the contract. And they never noticed.
It ended up being one of my most profitable jobs that year, because I was the unintended beneficiary of them screwing someone else.
And that’s the story of the time I sort of worked for Trump.
So what happens if a defendant won’t - or can’t - pay the judgments against him? Part of the CNN article said that a judge has ordered him to pay $89,000 to the two Fulton County election workers for their legal bills. He hasn’t, and now Mss Moss and Freeman are asking the judge to make him pay another $44,000. At what point, and how, can he be forced to pony up? Sure, it’s great that the judge is hitting him in the wallet, but if he’s not paying, that’s a gesture; and in the meantime, Mss. Moss and Freeman are on the hook to their legal team. Can the court eventually start seizing assets?
Wouldn’t it be risky to declare bankruptcy? Won’t the bankruptcy court want a lot of transparency in regards to his finances and business dealings?
If someone refuses to pay amounts that are owed as part of a judgment, then you will need to figure out what assets they have that might be of value, whether it’s their bank accounts, wages, or property. The state you’re trying to collect the property from will have their own set of rules regarding how to file a claim to seize property, garnish wages, or levy bank accounts based on an outstanding judgment you have against someone. Once you’ve convinced the state that the judgment debtor has property in their jurisdiction and has not paid their debt to you, they’ll probably give you an order which you take to the sheriff who has local jurisdiction, and they’ll commence with seizing and auctioning it if it’s not money, or getting a garnish set up on their wages.
Generally the debtor will not want this to happen, as the service fees that the state and the sheriff will charge you for help in collecting do not reduce the amount of the judgment they have to pay, so in essence the debtor pays those fees if the judgment ends up being fully recovered. Unless they simply don’t have enough assets, you having to get the authorities involved in collecting will cost them money in the long term. In the shortage of assets case though, only thing you’ll be getting are wage garnishes which will likely be a pittance. I have client who has a 7 figure judgment against someone and is getting around $70 every two weeks, as the debtor just doesn’t have anything else of value.
On the other hand, the amount of work that it will take to locate the assets and make the proper filings with the state, which you’ll probably have to hire a lawyer to do, might cost you a lot of time, effort, and/or money, and the judgment debtor might want to see you have to spend the money to chase after them. If it costs more to collect than the amount that can be collected, they won’t bother.
Side note - but considering the sheer number and criminal risks in all of his ongoing issues, does he want to have some random court appointed and overworked lawyer that only gives him the best they can do with the time allotted?
Sure, he can later claim ineffective council, but it also seems more likely he’ll end up with jail time rather than just destitution.
Honestly, I’d expect suicide (by booze and pills) more likely, rather than living the life of a pleb. But I could be wrong. I honestly expected him to flip around the time Trump first stiffed him on bills and he might have had a chance of attracting an offer sufficient to insulate him.
At some point, perhaps.
I don’t know how it works in the federal system, but at the California state level, we just appointed a public defender and left the “ability to pay” questions to be sorted out at a later time. The courts didn’t want defendants to be able to build delay into the process by having to prove indigence.
Oh, they go through a cursory preliminary query at the beginning. But if there is a significant or complicated dispute, they sort it out later.
Based on fictional TV shows and movies I’ve watched, when a cop or DA gets busted for corruption, all the people they’ve helped convict suddenly get their cases reopened or dismissed.
Does that have any basis in reality? And, if so, can some of these mobsters appeal their convictions because the guy who put them away proves to be corrupt?
Oh absolutely. This is from just a couple of months ago.
And note, that’s in Rudy’s old town.
So it’s possible, then, that Rudy’s delusional, treasonous loyalty to a wannabe mobster could lead to freedom for the actual mobsters he once helped put away?
MAGA!
1987 was I believe the last time Rudy put away a mobster. Anyone want to see if any of them are still in prison or even alive? A big deal is being made out of a mobster possibly getting out after 36 years? This seems like a really minor issue if it is one at all.
Not trying to make a “big deal” out of it – I’m just happy for any ironically nasty salt I can imagine rubbing in Rudy’s wounds as his life falls apart.
I’m not normally a vindictive person, but for some reason treason brings it out in me.
By the way, is the thread title “A thread for Rudy” a reference to something?
To avoid hijacks, please let only @Northern_Piper answer this question.
Thank you.
He’s planning to fight this all the way to the Supreme Courtyard by Marriot.