It should be added that eye witness testimony is considered the strongest kind of evidence. Having a witness say “yes I saw the accused do the crime”, is the gold standard, other kinds of forensic evidence which nowadays are thought of as conclusive (e.g. fingerprints) are lesser circumstantial evidence.
He’s a menace, just like Spider-Man!
I thought it was precisely the opposite because eye-witness testimony is so easy to cast doubts on. Human memory is incredibly unreliable.
Any judge who doesn’t do what Trump wants is highly conflicted. If it wasn’t the daughter it would be something else.
That may be the case but as a legal principle I thought that eye witness testimony of the crime was still considered the most damning kind. Hence why “circumstantial” is considered short hand for less damning kinds of evidence (even though it includes lots of kinds of evidence people nowadays would consider very damning)
As always though IANAL
There’s something pretty hilarious about Trump’s rants that new York juries are so biased against him. I mean they are literally his people. What does it say that the people who are from the same neighborhood as Trump and are far more likely than anyone else to have heard him before he ran for office, overwhelmingly despise him?
Does he know she’s from Colombia? I didn’t. I’m guessing he didn’t or he forgot. But, in any case, if we want the “if Merchan being from Colombia is a problem, then so is Cannon” thing to land, he has to make the Merchan-Colombia connection first. As it stands, the Colombia part is something we inferred from the dog whistle. If someone tells him that Cannon is Colombiam, he’ll drop that line of attack. Hopefully he’ll state it out loud or online soon, then we can jump on him.
One of the production people said it saved them from hiring twelve extras to sit in the jury box.
This assumes a level of fairness and consideration (or even the common sense to think mmmm maybe I shouldn’t cast xenophobic aspersions about the one person whose standing between me and decades in prison) that is conspicuously lacking in Trump
Particularly when you consider the long-standing racist tradition of declaring some members of the generally despised group as “one of the good ones”. Trump wouldn’t have any difficulty flipping back and forth between hating one and loving the other, no matter how logically hypocritical it would be.
As a legal principle, there is no difference. It’s totally up to the jury. Here’s the 9th Circuit pattern jury instruction on it, but it’s a pretty universal concept.
Evidence may be direct or circumstantial. Direct evidence is direct proof of a fact, such as testimony by a witness about what that witness personally saw or heard or did. Circumstantial evidence is indirect evidence, that is, it is proof of one or more facts from which one can find another fact.
You are to consider both direct and circumstantial evidence. Either can be used to prove any fact. The law makes no distinction between the weight to be given to either direct or circumstantial evidence. It is for you to decide how much weight to give to any evidence.
I would imagine it’s eyewitness identification that’s problematic.
‘Yes, that’s the stranger I saw running out of the bank.’
vs
'Yes, I watched my brother-in-law commit this crime."
I really hope the defense does this. 90 seconds is a long flipping time when you’re just sitting there with nobody doing anything.
Probably the prosecution. But agreed, it’s effective.
Ah, you’re probably right. rc’s remark followed a description for the defense cross, so I jumped to that interpretation. It would make a lot more sense for the prosecution to do it… not that making sense seems to play a big role in the defense strategy…
sorry for the confusion. most of the lawyers who said they would do the 90 second break were former prosecutors on various news casts.
my first thought was 90 seconds is a really long time during a plank hold. also that cohen and trump had a code talking thing. they wouldn’t need to have 5 minutes or more to say what they needed to get this scheme going.
Seems like a bad idea to do plank holds during a business call.
Ahem, it’s called multi-tasking. This is why you’ll never be a billionaire stable genius.
It does seem unlikely, true.
I blame my past:
In Trump’s case, it’s called being ambidextrous.