|
|
Post by Dave's Not Here Man on Oct 2, 2023 14:57:06 GMT -5
is fraud, and fraud is criminal. What am I missing here?
|
|
|
|
Post by minx on Oct 2, 2023 15:34:48 GMT -5
Is there a difference between civil and criminal fraud?
The civil case requires the plaintiff to prove that the defendant caused injury to him or her through fraudulent activities. However, in the criminal fraud case, the prosecution must prove these charges are true and that the person committed fraud beyond a reasonable doubt with the judge or jury panel.
Just for you!
I'm thinking the difference is between me telling you that investing in Me Incorporated is a great idea because I have tons o bucks. You had a reasonable trust that I wouldn't lie to you.
Criminal is proving that I definitely did lie and there is concrete proof that I did.
Civil is easier to prove of course...
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave's Not Here Man on Oct 3, 2023 11:06:21 GMT -5
I know a person that did 12 years for writing bad checks. What is the difference?
|
|
|
|
Post by minx on Oct 3, 2023 13:00:09 GMT -5
I think it's the burden of proof.
When you're kiting a check, it's easier to prove that you intended to write it knowing it was bad, so you can bring criminal charges.
Kind of like OJ - in his criminal case, they had to prove beyond doubt that he did it (and as we all know, the glove DID NOT FIT!)
When he was sued in civil court, they only had to prove that he could have done it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave's Not Here Man on Oct 3, 2023 13:42:00 GMT -5
Makes sense.
The intent can be exactly the same but it can be difficult to determine someone else's intent, which wherein lies legal advantage to the accused (no matter how guilty they are). And then there's conspiracies which are probably just as easy to defend I suppose.
|
|
|
|
Post by minx on Oct 4, 2023 8:54:07 GMT -5
It just gets more and more complex - I swear the intent is to just confuse those who can't afford a decent lawyer into pleading out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave's Not Here Man on Oct 5, 2023 11:51:12 GMT -5
I can't help but be only so fair-minded when it comes to certain things like this. The law is either onething or it's nothing. The combover platapus literally stood outside the courtroom tossing his poison pill salad, mouthing words of manipulation and propaganda, all while breaking the court's gag order while still in the fucking building. He even suggested the DA be arrested/prosecuted as well as several other comments that should have had HIM arrested and sent straight to jail for those violations. Instead the DA made a statement. Jesus. A statement. As great as that statement might have been (although I didn't see the "race baiting" she mentioned) it was not spoken from a position of strength of the law, therefore it was just more blabber from another blabberer. He won't get a criminal conviction and will win 2024. It's truly time to exercise the straightforward conviction that the rule of law is supposed to carry regardless of who it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by minx on Oct 5, 2023 12:20:27 GMT -5
Agreed - that DA should have walked right back into the courtroom and asked to find him in contempt and have him arrested AND detained until trial.
And the same should go for his sons and daughter as well.
Either there's a gag order or there's not. And either it's against the law to threaten a court official or it's not.
I know people thrown into jail and stuck there for months awaiting a ruling for a lot less.
|
|
|
|
Post by k9krap on Oct 5, 2023 16:48:29 GMT -5
Again, any of us peons would already be in jail if we had half as many indictments.
The gag order was protection for the judges staff. I don’t think the prosecutor falls into that category.
|
|
|
|
Post by minx on Oct 6, 2023 8:58:38 GMT -5
Doesn't matter - shows a pattern of clear disregard for the judge's order. And the DA should have been in asking for that order to be expanded to say that Trump AND HIS TEAM cannot discuss ANYONE attached to this case - that includes prosecutor, staff, witnesses, ect.
And I say that if you're out there calling for the DA to be arrested among other things, you're making a direct threat. But, if the DA does anything, Trump's legal team will move for a change of venue because the DA is now 'biased' against him. Which is exactly what they want - to have the trial moved to some sleepy little town where it won't attract attention.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave's Not Here Man on Oct 6, 2023 10:19:12 GMT -5
Won't attract attention? AHHHHHH-HAHAHAHAHA!
There can't be a change of venue if the trial has started so the best case for the defense would be a mistrial. Given what I understand to be an abundance of evidence against him, and the meticulous way they have handled that evidence, there's currently no case for one.
He has fled to the security of his appeasers and probably won't return to that court unless 1) it's time for the verdict or 2) he pushes the button that may have been marked DO NOT PUSH and the Judge orders him to appear for contempt.
|
|
