Judge Juan Merchan has found former President Donald Trump in contempt for violating the gag order in his hush money trial for the 10th time and said he’ll consider jail time going forward.
If it’s such a problem to put Trump in jail, why isn’t it for any random person?
Because he is a former president of the United States who is currently running for re-election. This situation is unique in American history. As much as we may dislike these facts, they are true. The judge is in uncharted waters here, and needs to be careful to avoid anything that can be construed as evidence of bias against the defendant. This trial will be under scrutiny for as long as we have a country.
It’s not fair that most defendants do not have the essentially limitless resources of the entire conservative political machine at their disposal to pay for their legal woes, but it is the reality of the situation.
Yeah so let’s treat him the same way as anyone else so he can use that as an excuse to stop the procedure against him, that will sure show him!
Of all the cases where people want the judge to treat the accused the same way they would be treated in order to prove a point, this is probably the worst one.
No, this random commenter on Lemmy is absolutely not enabling Trump’s bullshit. We’re just trying to explain the behavior of the judge, we have nothing to do with it.
It’s (stichadtic) terrorism and you’re just like “but dude! It might not stick!”
Stochastic terrorism is, obviously, what they’re trying to avoid with the gag order. The judge and his family are already victims, and he knows full well that the jury and witnesses are at risk. No offense intended, but I suspect he understands the situation he’s in better than you do.
It’s still treating Trump different than most. If it’s such a problem to put Trump in jail, why isn’t it for any random person?
Of course it is.
Because he is a former president of the United States who is currently running for re-election. This situation is unique in American history. As much as we may dislike these facts, they are true. The judge is in uncharted waters here, and needs to be careful to avoid anything that can be construed as evidence of bias against the defendant. This trial will be under scrutiny for as long as we have a country.
It’s not fair that most defendants do not have the essentially limitless resources of the entire conservative political machine at their disposal to pay for their legal woes, but it is the reality of the situation.
And in so doing, hold a bias for the asshole.
The judge is biased on the side of Justice. Getting the case thrown out out of principle wouldn’t help anyone but Trump.
That’s bullshit and you know it.
There are established rules and procedures. When you fudge them on one side, to avoid appearing biased to the other….
That is itself bias. against your “side of justice”.
This judge is afraid of Trump; and in his fear making a mockery of justice. You know it, I know it, and Trump knows it. Even the judge knows it.
Yeah so let’s treat him the same way as anyone else so he can use that as an excuse to stop the procedure against him, that will sure show him!
Of all the cases where people want the judge to treat the accused the same way they would be treated in order to prove a point, this is probably the worst one.
That’s not how it works.
You’re enabling Trump’s bullshit.
It’s (stochastic) terrorism and you’re just like “but dude! It might not stick!”
Wonder what you say when trump’s cultist kill off witnesses and jurors?
No, this random commenter on Lemmy is absolutely not enabling Trump’s bullshit. We’re just trying to explain the behavior of the judge, we have nothing to do with it.
Stochastic terrorism is, obviously, what they’re trying to avoid with the gag order. The judge and his family are already victims, and he knows full well that the jury and witnesses are at risk. No offense intended, but I suspect he understands the situation he’s in better than you do.
So you would rather see him not face any consequences for the crime he has committed except for a weekend in jai, all out of principle?
So you’re okay with terrorism.
Oh look, I can play that game too! The process is meant for the judge to be neutral. Any other position risks the validity of the trial.
Your argument flies in the face of justice.
Criminal court is intended to be biased towards the defendant. Hence the “beyond a reasonable doubt” burden of proof.
(Obviously that bias is often not upheld properly, and plenty of people are railroaded by the system into unjust convictions.)
The stakes are genuinely higher for the court (and the nation) than in your average trial. Gotta be careful.