I don’t think it was a serious “threat to flee.” Hate to defend that guy, but I can’t see that as indicating an intent to violate his release conditions.
He is currently free on his own recognizance until his sentencing. That was decided at the end of the trial.
The sentencing itself has now been delayed a couple times, but that seems to be par for the course
It is, especially in high profile cases. In this one, I wouldn’t be surprised (or disappointed) if it was delayed again to a date past the election. Safest choice all around.
No, he is not. Here is a summary covering the arraignment of Trump.
He then turns to the question of conditions of Trump’s release. He notes that under New York law these charges are not eligible for bail and that Trump surrendered voluntarily for processing and arraignment.
The “he” in that quote is Christopher Conroy, one of the prosecutors. Bail was not required for the charges Trump faced.
Now, Trump himself claimed he had to post bail, but as usual he was full of crap.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/03/politics/fact-check-trump-bail-campaign-schedule/index.html
Trump said: “New York City is a violent city; it’s become violent with the cashless bail. I’m the only one who has to put up bail.”
Facts First: Trump’s claim is false. Like many other New York defendants whose alleged crimes are non-violent, he didn’t have to put up bail. After his arraignment in 2023, he was released on his own recognizance — in other words, without having to post any cash.
Because everyone knows that this was just bullshit and bluster. It was … a joke! Ya, that’s the ticket!
I appreciate your being fair to an unappealing defendant. But it was really obvious to me that when Trump said Venezuela, he meant El Salvador, and that his fleeing to El Salvador, should he lose the election, is realistic.
The Musk interview came two months after this was in the news:
Of course, I don’t expect a judge to lock someone up because their son threatens to flee. But do you really say that, oh, yea, the defendant threatened to flee between conviction and sentencing, but we all thought it was a joke? In a normal situation, when the defendant does flee, it is going to make the prosecution look negligent to have ignored this.
I guess the idea of equal justice is pretty much gone here.
As I cited, it is standard practice to not require bail when someone is charged with non-violent crimes in New York. I don’t expect them to demand he be put into custody based on some comments he made, especially when he says a lot of things he doesn’t follow through on.
It is an unusual situation, when the Supreme Court gives a ruling that may create constitutional limitations on the power to prosecute the accused. I don’t blame Judge Merchan for taking his time to be fully briefed on this new constitutional principle and determine how it affects the case before him.
Here is the key: as a former president, Individual-ONE has a Secret Service security detail. They are tasked with protecting him. However, they are also government employees, working with the Secret Service, which means they are not Individual-ONE’s drone bodyguards: they do not take orders from him, and they can, at least in theory, prevent him from engaging in illegal acts, such as fleeing the country. At least in theory. He is not-in-custody/in-custody.
Maybe the headline has it wrong, but it really does read like Trump is saying he’ll stop complaining if the judge pushes back the trial date.
He’s had the trial. It’s the sentencing date that he’s trying to blackmail Merchan into pushing back.
But we knew what you meant. 
Trying to bargain with a judge, who has already rejected a particular argument three times, never works out well.
Hey judge! I’ll stop shit posting about your daughter if you give me a break. Have we got a deal here or what?
“Bold move, Cotton, let’s see if it pays off.”
What am I, some kind of law…talking …person?
Legal people are annoyingly precise. 
I once witnessed a Crown prosecutor, arguing before the Court of Appeal, have a Simpsons moment. Pressed on an argument, he said: “You guys know the law.”
In theory, there could eventually come a time when the Mafia sues Donald Trump for copyright infringement.
Heh. Given the quality if his attorneys lately, the Mafia might win the case.
Yep. Does anything think trump is telling the truth- anytime, anywhere?
I am pretty sure he is still on bail.
He is on the Georgia case, anyway-
https://www.law.virginia.edu/node/2171231
released on his own recognizance; these offences don’t require bail under NY law; see post by @Atamasama earlier today: