Donald Trump’s right − he is getting special treatment, far better than most other criminal defendants

submitted by ActuallyNot from theconversation.com

all 13 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Oyveygoyim 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Get this liberal bullshit out of here. He's a former president for fucks sake

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It's comical how you can still have Trumps dick in your mouth with the walking clusterfuck pedo occupying the White House. Fuckoff pussy!

[–]passionflounderIndependent 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

OrangeManBadBadBad®. Bad-bad-bad! He must be found guilty and imprisoned at once!!! We can sort out details and fashion facts later.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The indictments presented by Jack Smith do have a lot of compelling evidence. It is important that he is tried before the election, as this supreme court would probably find that a President can pardon themselves. So a speedy trial is critical to the rights of the people in this case.

[–]SoCo 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Let us analyses these gripes:

1) Early warnings

Yes, in almost all cases, they must inform you. They can only seal an investigation for so long. If investigators have encroached on your rights via court warrant, they must inform you and can only stay off doing so for so long through filing motions to seal these actions from being divulged.

2) The difference freedom makes

judges found he was not a flight risk and released him.

That is how this is supposed to work. Abusing accused people with incarceration, while awaiting charges, is barbaric and inhumane. Many states and many federal bills seek to abolish these terrible cash bond systems. Unfortunately, like in my state of Illinois, whom just abolished the cash bond, frequently these are just political moves and there is no real comprehensive criminal justice reform plan behind it.

3) Benefits of time and freedom

This continues lamenting the same. Appalled that Trump was able to prepare a defense and not punished before having a trial.

4) A treasure-trove of information

Prosecutors often withhold documents until the eve of trial or wait until after key witnesses have testified, all of which is legal. In some cases, they fail to disclose the information.

This is called pre-trial arraignment and the discovery process. This is required in every trial. It is appalling that the discovery process is routinely withheld, violating the Constitutional rights of defendants and tainting many trials. This is normal and how it is supposed to always be. You are not charged with a crime, until all the charges are ready, they are quickly to be explained in detail to you, the possible penalties, and their required legal bits. Then, the prosecution is REQUIRED to provide any and ALL evidence against you, before the trial starts. They are not permitted to withhold any of this information, whether it is damming to your case or helpful to arguing your innocence. We don't try people for crimes in the dark, with secret evidence. That would not be fair and the prosecution has ALL duty to prove guilt, getting none of the benefit of doubt. This is by design and how all trials are supposed to work. It is a shame they are so corrupted that this is not common. We've even seen these factors abused in recent high-profile cases.

5) The other side of the coin

This section pretends that the prosecutors did these things, not because they are required by law for all trials, embellished in the Constitution, and routine requirements of court trials....but instead to help inform the public and legitimize their cases.

6) What would fairness look like?

This section acknowledges how all these normal court things are very unfair if not done and how everyone should get these normal, required, benefits. It is a corrupt shame that they don't.

Conclusion

What a weird and shameful attempt to confuse the reader about how court trials work and to normalize the constant criminal justice system's abuse of the standard, poor, defendant, whom would not have anyone to raise issue with their trial being being manipulated.

Some of us have had this pretrial detention, based on a crime they provably did not commit, loosing everything. Waiting in the thunder-dome with murders and rapists, literally fighting for each meal, while trial after trial is rescheduled out, 5 or so months into waiting, to present your poof of innocence. Then the case is dismissed and you are kicked out onto the streets with only the items they didn't loose of yours, when you were arrested. Given not even an apology. This happened to me, which is why, at one time, I wanted to become a lawyer. This also happens very routinely. This is what the shit-bird writer wished for Trump.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Yes, in almost all cases, they must inform you.

In Trump's case, earlier than others.

That is how this is supposed to work. Abusing accused people with incarceration, while awaiting charges, is barbaric and inhumane.

And yet three-quarters of federal criminal defendants are locked up to await trial.

Appalled that Trump was able to prepare a defense and not punished before having a trial.

Unlike other defendants, who want a speedy trial, Trump wants his to come never. That is an unnamed date, but after the election. This is not an attempt to prepare a defence. This is an attempt to shore up enough power to stop the prosecution.

This is called pre-trial arraignment and the discovery process.

Discovery doesn't usually involve such a detailed description of the charges to be laid by the prosecution, nor the exact claims that the prosecution will make this far out.

This is what the shit-bird writer wished for Trump.

Shit-bird writers

Christopher Robertson, Professor of Law, Boston University and Russell M. Gold, Associate Professor of Law, University of Alabama

[–]SoCo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

And yet three-quarters of federal criminal defendants are locked up to await trial.

This is determined by flight risk and is always meant to be only to secure return to court and never meant to be a punishment, as the DOJ is explicitly not to punish people who haven't been convicted of a crime....purposely.

Professor of Law / Associate Professor of Law

Holly fuck! You mean the commie assholes that were arguing against the Constitution and for Trump to be abused by the system, like what unfortunately happens, violating the Constitutional rights of people, routinely......these shit-birds are professors of laws.

I guess you can always find some integrity-less shit-bird in a position of educational authority to say any crazy corrupt and communistic garbage you want.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

This is determined by flight risk and is always meant to be only to secure return to court and never meant to be a punishment, as the DOJ is explicitly not to punish people who haven't been convicted of a crime....purposely.

The reality is that of the 427 thousand or so people who are in jail and not convicted, their mostly there because of bail practises. That's only tangentially related to flight risk.

Holly fuck!

Is that when a pastor has sex with the young son of a congregant?

Or only if he does it in the church?

You mean the commie assholes that were arguing against the Constitution and for Trump to be abused by the system, like what unfortunately happens, violating the Constitutional rights of people, routinely......these shit-birds are professors of laws.

I'm not sure how to parse that sentence. Which commie assholes are we talking about here?

[–]SoCo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Your shameful legal scholars lied and cheered for the abuse of a defendant, the abuse of their Constitutional rights, and for the department of justice to apply punishment to a UN-convicted person. Your legal scholars are the names behind weaponized DOJ that keeps getting talked about. They should lose their bar license or scholarly positions for such a fascist attack on Constitutional rights.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

The legal scholars are pointing out that Trump is getting better treatment than most people.

It's useful to know, because he's claiming that he's a victim.

Georgia will process him like every other defendant it seems. So we will get the mugshot and prints when he turns himself in. I suspect he'll need to be arrested.

Your legal scholars are the names behind weaponized DOJ that keeps getting talked about.

That's exactly the lie that we're countering here. The DOJ is has been playing with the kiddie gloves. The truth is that they're anti-weaponized.

They should lose their bar license or scholarly positions for such a fascist attack on Constitutional rights.

There's no constitutional right not to be arrested if you are suspected of a crime.

[–]SoCo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The legal scholars are pointing out

They seem more to be wishing that upon him.

Georgia will process him like every other defendant it seems.

Why would they not? There is no alternative.

That's exactly the lie that we're countering here. The DOJ is has been playing with the kiddie gloves. The truth is that they're anti-weaponized.

They are illegally charging a President for Free Speech issues and doing his legal duty as President. This will never end well. There is no other option, but weaponization as a cause. No rational person would accept reckless incompetence on such a scale from so many people.

There's no constitutional right not to be arrested if you are suspected of a crime.

The Fourth Amendment adds many limitations to that situation.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They seem more to be wishing that upon him.

I would think that they would wish that everyone be treated equally. That's the basis of the rule of law, and that is a foundational element of the American democracy.

Why would they not?

They didn't in New York.

There is no alternative.

It's good that you'd think so. However, Trump is getting better treatment than other defendents.

They are illegally charging a President for Free Speech issues and doing his legal duty as President.

Not even close.

You don't have a free speech right to conspire to overturn an election. You don't have a free speech right to breach voting machines. You don't have a free speed right to convene groups of fake electors to the electoral college in six states that you lost, and have them make fake votes for you and not the candidate that the people chose. You don't have a free speech right to fake documentation that falsely presents their votes as the correct ones.

You don't have a free speech right to intimidate witnesses. You don't have a free speech right to threaten officials, nor call a violent mob to the capital to delay an official proceeding. In fact any act to interfere with or delay any official proceeding is a crime.

The DoJ convened a grand jury to ensure that there was transparency around the charges. They published the indictments. They are being extremely careful to show that they are not doing anything illegal, and they have done that.

You claiming its illegal doesn't make it so.

The Fourth Amendment adds many limitations to that situation.

It does, and they were not breached. When you are a suspect in a crime, and they have evidence such as they do in this case, you don't have a constitutional right not to be arrested.

[–]BobOki 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You guys cannot shit all over Reddit for censoring speech... then do the same shit. Stop being hypocrites!