Trump Ignores the Courts

[Orange_Crush]

Jury exit led to a public hallway where there were agents. They didn't arrest him. Need proof beyond a reasonable doubt. She doesn't have to testify about her motives. How is the government gonna to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that she was trying to obstruct justice if the guy was led to a public hallway where there were agents waiting for him.

She going to plead the fifth?

 

[evillawyer]

She going to plead the fifth?

That's the system we have. The accused doesn't have to take the stand or prove their innocence. The State has the burden of proof and they have to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Without testimony about what was going on in her head, I think this is a tough case to prove. Good defense lawyers just need to sow some piece of doubt and she wins.

 

[Orange_Crush]

That's the system we have. The accused doesn't have to take the stand or prove their innocence. The State has the burden of proof and they have to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Without testimony about what was going on in her head, I think this is a tough case to prove. Good defense lawyers just need to sow some piece of doubt and she wins.

Will she need to plead the 5th to escape testifying?

 

[whodeycin85]

Will she need to plead the 5th to escape testifying?

She has to...and if so I parade every person that ever worked in her court and ask them if the door has ever been used to anyone other then jurors or court personal..they will either have numerous witnessnes saying they never have seen that or she'll have to concede that behavior was out of the ordinary which may make it look worse

 

[EasternVol]

That is an incredibly disingenuous description of the claims.

The judge became angry that they were there. Tried to stop them from doing their job by misrepresenting the law. Thought she got all of them out of the hallway and into the chief judge's office. Double checked that she'd cleared them out of the hallway. Postponed his case without participation from or notification to the prosecutor on the case. Walked him out of a juror exit that isn't supposed to be used by defendants.

She cleared the agents. Postponed the case so that he could leave before the agents came back. Personally escorted him out of the courtroom in such a way that he had a better chance of leaving unnoticed.

It sounds like you saw it all.

 

[Orange_Crush]

She has to...and if so I parade every person that ever worked in her court and ask them if the door has ever been used to anyone other then jurors or court personal..they will either have numerous witnessnes saying they never have seen that or she'll have to concede that behavior was out of the ordinary which may make it look worse

More than that, it's my understanding that pleading the 5th doesn't always protect someone in a criminal case with a jury, as despite instructions, jurors often see this as an admission of guilt.

If she waves the right to a jury, she's going before a federal judge who won't be stupid, nor is it a slam dunk that they would look favorably on obvious misuse of the bench and a local judge obstructing justice.

Additionally, the 5th doesn't protect one from its consequences in civil contexts, and could be a problem for her if it's brought to the bar, from what I understand.


But all that aside, I'm glad to see this, even if they can't make it stick in court. **** like this needs accountability, and if enough of these activist judges are brought charges when appropriate, maybe it'll be second thoughts to the next ones.

 

[Orange_Crush]

It sounds like you saw it all.

Looks like you didn't read my post carefully enough.

 

[EasternVol]

Looks like you didn't read my post carefully enough.

Looks like I know better than to believe everything reported early on about a politically charged incident.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Looks like I know better than to believe everything reported early on about a politically charged incident.

Looks like I used the word "claims" for a specific reason. One would assume that people reading that would give the benefit of the doubt that what follows is a description of the claims, unless they were just trolling for an opportunity to be an ***.

 

[Ashevolle]

Due process is following the law and procedures for a specific government action.

What law or process, specifically, do you contend was not followed here?

I am wrong in my understanding that the mom had the authority to take her child out of the US?

I will be out of cell range for the next few hours, but I am interested in your reply. I will get back with you when I have service.

What process wasnt followed here? The entire court process of deportation proceedings. Due process guarantees the right to be heard on court amongst other things.

And it's foolish to claim the mom willingly took her infant out of the country voluntarily without being able to confer with the father or a lawyer or access the court system first. What's she gonna do? Hand the kid over to federal agents and hope for the best? Saying she voluntarily chose to to take the kid out of the country ignores she was a prisoner given zero other options.

 

[whodeycin85]

What process wasnt followed here? The entire court process of deportation proceedings. Due process guarantees the right to be heard on court amongst other things.

And it's foolish to claim the mom willingly took her infant out of the country voluntarily without being able to confer with the father or a lawyer or access the court system first. What's she gonna do? Hand the kid over to federal agents and hope for the best? Saying she voluntarily chose to to take the kid out of the country ignores she was a prisoner given zero other options.

She had a choice to either take the child whom she had sole custody of...or the child become a ward of the state and the father could get custody at that point...she made a choice to illegally come to a country and risk deportation which doesn't require any additional due process beside what she got

 

[OrangeTsar]

Article says mom was deported, and she wanted to take her 2 year old, whom I presume she had legal custody over (it is not reported), with her.

Seems the two year old wasn’t “deported” without due process, the child was taken out of country by her mother when the mother was deported. The government does appear to have facilitated that at her request.

Keeping a child with her mother rather than separating the two seems the right thing to do, unless there is more to the story as reported.

The left LOVED it when Clinton and Reno did it though didn’t they?

 

[OrangeTsar]

“These nazis! They’re deporting 2 year old children! With their mother, who wanted to take them!”

It’s basically the same as the fake leukemia story Huff was trying to sell us on

The irony that the left continuously calls the administration “Nazis” without fear of being arrested for such speech is totally lost on these people. If this were truly a fascist state; the jails would be full of people making such claims.
If Trump wanted to be a dictator, he is failing miserably at the task

 

[OrangeTsar]

Jury exit led to a public hallway where there were agents. They didn't arrest him. Need proof beyond a reasonable doubt. She doesn't have to testify about her motives. How is the government gonna to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that she was trying to obstruct justice if the guy was led to a public hallway where there were agents waiting for him.

1) if she wasn’t trying to prevent his arrest, then why not have him exit through the main doors? The very fact that she LED him through a room that was off limits to him speaks loudly of intent.
2) there are NUMEROUS witnesses who saw the screaming confrontation that the Judge had with the FEDERAL agents in the hallway calling the whole thing “absurd”. Once again, strong indication of intent.

If this issue didn’t involve Trump, you wouldn’t have even care about it. Judges are arrested all of the time. If she is innocent, she gets her say in court.

 

[Orange_Crush]

The irony that the left continuously calls the administration “Nazis” without fear of being arrested for such speech is totally lost on these people. If this were truly a fascist state; the jails would be full of people making such claims.
If Trump wanted to be a dictator, he is failing miserably at the task

These folks should go to somewhere like Nicaragua and just hang out for a while. Observe the locals. Try to have pretty much ANY political conversation with them. Then when they're feeling froggy, insult or accuse the government.

 

[OrangeTsar]

These folks should go to somewhere like Nicaragua and just hang out for a while. Observe the locals. Try to have pretty much ANY political conversation with them. Then when they're feeling froggy, insult or accuse the government.

Trump is the first “dictator” in human history to arrest zero political opponents and to shrink the size of the government.

 

[Orangeslice13]

The irony that the left continuously calls the administration “Nazis” without fear of being arrested for such speech is totally lost on these people. If this were truly a fascist state; the jails would be full of people making such claims.
If Trump wanted to be a dictator, he is failing miserably at the task

And vigorously defend Abraham Lincoln who did exactly what you’re describing. Jailed the press and anyone who spoke out against him while outright ignoring the courts.

 

[evillawyer]

1) if she wasn’t trying to prevent his arrest, then why not have him exit through the main doors? The very fact that she LED him through a room that was off limits to him speaks loudly of intent.
2) there are NUMEROUS witnesses who saw the screaming confrontation that the Judge had with the FEDERAL agents in the hallway calling the whole thing “absurd”. Once again, strong indication of intent.

If this issue didn’t involve Trump, you wouldn’t have even care about it. Judges are arrested all of the time. If she is innocent, she gets her say in court.

If the standard were "more likely than not," she'd be toast. But it's "beyond a reasonable doubt." All a good attorney has to do is sow a little doubt. And this will be before a Milwaukee jury. So, good luck getting a conviction lads.

 

[OrangeTsar]

If the standard were "more likely than not," she'd be toast. But it's "beyond a reasonable doubt." All a good attorney has to do is sow a little doubt. And this will be before a Milwaukee jury. So, good luck getting a conviction lads.

The administration has been looking for a test Case like this ever since inauguration. They would make sure that they had the best possible chances for a conviction and they will have all of their ducks in a row. The sheer Number of corroborated Details coming from people within the court indicate that some of her coworkers are unhappy with what she did. Patel and Bondi weren’t going to spoil their first attempt on a 50/50 case.
Dugan is going down.
Ps; even if she does avoid conviction, she will still be bankrupt from legal fees and her reputation will be in tatters. Probably will be disbarred as well.

 

[Orange_Crush]

The administration has been looking for a test Case like this ever since inauguration. They would make sure that they had the best possible chances for a conviction and they will have all of their ducks in a row. The sheer Number of corroborated Details coming from people within the court indicate that some of her coworkers are unhappy with what she did. Patel and Bondi weren’t going to spoil their first attempt on a 50/50 case.
Dugan is going down.
Ps; even if she does avoid conviction, she will still be bankrupt from legal fees and her reputation will be in tatters. Probably will be disbarred as well.

Even if she gets off, the system worked as designed.

 

[OrangeTsar]

Even if she gets off, the system worked as designed.

I do fully expect Soros or one of the other dem deep pocketed individuals to pay for her legal representation though.
The good news is that the democrats continue to trip all over themselves with their choices of who they choose to defend; wife beating gang members and now an (allegedly) corrupt judge.
Trump’s one true superpower is making the Democrats constantly defend the indefensible

 

[CobbVol]

Even if she gets off, the system worked as designed.

Her protecting and obstructing are really not the worse part. She did this mid-trial with this dude being tried for abusing a couple. He beat them until they were hospitalized. The victims were there in the courtroom and she stops everything to help put this guy back on the streets before the trial was completed.

 

[hog88]

The deported mother chose to take her child with her...she had the option to allow the child to become a ward of the state...

Don’t confuse them with details, it ruins a perfectly good whine.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

 

[Orangeslice13]

If the standard were "more likely than not," she'd be toast. But it's "beyond a reasonable doubt." All a good attorney has to do is sow a little doubt. And this will be before a Milwaukee jury. So, good luck getting a conviction lads.

They don’t need one. She’s done as a judge