419
submitted 5 months ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] soul@lemmy.world 46 points 5 months ago

It's not like Trump is going to prison for this. He's old, has no record, and did serve as president, regardless of how people feel about it. Plus, he's going to appeal, which means this thing will drag on long enough to still not matter, sadly.

[-] elliot_crane@lemmy.world 38 points 5 months ago

In the state of New York, you serve time while awaiting appeal. If the judge opts to remand him to house arrest, which I think is the most likely outcome, his ass is staying put until his next court date.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

That’s incorrect. It’s at the discretion of the judge to mandate imprisonment, place the felon on home confinement, subject to a curfew, or allow posting bail while awaiting appeal in NY.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-is-convicted-felon-now-what-2024-05-30/

[-] elliot_crane@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago

NYS BAR Association: https://nysba.org/NYSBA/Publications/LegalEASE%20Pamphlet%20Series/PUBS_LegalEase_YourRIghtsToAppealInCriminalCase_final.pdf

Bear in mind that the sentence imposed by the lower court will go into effect while the appeal is being considered by the appellate court unless the trial judge or appellate court stays the sentence or a part of it (orders that it not go into effect). The order staying the judgment of conviction and sentence may include a requirement to post bail.

The “unless” (emphasis mine) is the operative word. The trial judge can choose to exercise discretion, but is under no requirement to specify any changes upon receiving an appeal.

That is to say, the default procedure is, as I said above, the convicted party serves their sentence during the time the appeal is being processed and considered.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

You’re technically correct, but your comment may have mislead others to think remaining incarcerated was likely. It’s far more common to allow for exceptions during appeal of a nonviolent crime. He’ll also gain favor as a former President, as the judge will determine eligibility based on character and previous record.

With that being said, I don’t think sentencing will include prison time, due to the fact that they’re nonviolent class E felonies. I hope I’m wrong.

[-] Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz 3 points 5 months ago

He will also likely never go to a real prison. I hate that draft dodging piece of garbage, and it warms my crusty, veteran heart that now since he is a felon he is not allowed to be buried with military honors and any honors he receives are illegitimate, but he was a president and thus exploded to a lot of classified information.

His bitch ass would sing like a canary if he was in Gen pop and we would lose even more security because of it. Him being in his own private island like Napoleon (2nd time) would be ideal. Let him sit there in isolation, get his meals, and fade away into nothing.

Then he has hell to look forward to, along with all his supporters.

[-] catloaf@lemm.ee 7 points 5 months ago

That's assuming they actually sentence him to any kind of confinement and not just a really big fine (that he can't and won't pay anyway).

[-] Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 22 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I mean, that judge is NOT happy with Trump, and has already lamented the fact that fines mean nothing to him.

[-] bamfic@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago

Ooh this is an interesting point! I wonder if the continual fines having no effect to stop him from violating the gag order will give the judge a very defensible reason to sentence for something other than a fine.

[-] soul@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

While that may mean there is a technical component to it, that's not what people mean when they're thinking about it. Being put into a prison is what people are referring to and that isn't likely to happen.

[-] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 12 points 5 months ago

He has a record. He also was convicted of ~~rape~~ sexual assault and also defaming said woman twice.

[-] soul@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago

No, he had a sexual abuse charge, not rape. None of the above was a criminal charge, only civil.

[-] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 12 points 5 months ago
[-] PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The TL;DR is that the jurisdiction in which the case happened has a very narrow definition of what constitutes rape; It requires penis-in-vagina insertion. Anything else is “only” sexual abuse.

Trump grabbed her breasts and inserted his fingers into her vagina. All of it non-consensually. But where it happened, that isn’t enough to qualify as rape, because it didn’t involve PiV sex. The judge was clarifying that no, the case didn’t say he raped her, but that is only because of the incredibly narrow definition of the word “rape”. The judge was basically saying that in common parlance, (not the jurisdiction’s narrow legal definitions), most people would agree that what Trump did was in fact rape.

The judge’s statement was in response to Trump’s lawyers going “LoL wEll AkShuAllY hE nEveR RapED HeR”, like some sort of “it’s not actually pedophilia it’s ephebophilia, and that’s not as bad” argument. The judge’s statement is also in line with what psychiatric fields and the justice department define as rape, which includes penetration with any appendages or objects. But again, the local laws had a narrower definition.

Also worth noting that New York quickly changed their legal definitions following the lawsuit. Because the lawsuit was a giant beacon to the fact that they were one of the last places in the country to still strictly define rape as PiV penetration. So if it were to happen again today, the verdict would have said Trump raped her.

[-] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

You might be intending to reply to someone else, I actually explained these exact points in a couple other comments.

Oh, are you just adding a general tldr for everyone who isn't aware? Got it.

[-] PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The point of a TL;DR is to explain the link to third parties, and maybe add some context. I’m assuming you’ve already read the article, and it wasn’t directed at you.

[-] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I think you might be intending to reply to somebody else, I just wrote that to you in the previous comment.

[-] newnton@sh.itjust.works 12 points 5 months ago

But we can still hope

[-] settoloki@lemmy.one 3 points 5 months ago

Yes but he also disrespected the court (falling to sleep and badmouthing people on social media), shows no remorse (claiming innocence despite a unanimous jury) had 34 charges against him (all unanimous) and did it to trick his way into the highest position in office. Which should all be considered when sentencing.

[-] soul@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

One would hope.

[-] Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz 1 points 5 months ago

No record might matter if it wasn’t for 34 counts. If it was one or two non-violent felonies that could be made whole, could be weekends or lots of community service. But 34? No one gets to use the “I was a good little boy” defense on that.

[-] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago
[-] Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz 1 points 5 months ago

Nah. Not for Trump. Unless one of the counts was for having a dime bag.

[-] InternetUser2012@midwest.social 1 points 5 months ago

I'd agree with you if he had up to maybe 15-20 felonies. He got 34. What grounds do you think he can appeal on?

[-] soul@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

You're operating on a fallacy. You can only be tried and convicted once per crime. Every single one is an opportunity for an appeal. Having more just increases the likelihood that there will be at least some possible appeal. The easiest route will probably be an appeal against whatever the sentence itself is once that's issued, especially if he's sentenced to serve time. But it doesn't matter; his lawyers will simply look for every single possible way to delay the process, as they have continuously done.

[-] InternetUser2012@midwest.social 1 points 5 months ago

Again, he has to have a reason for appeal, what reason do you think he has to appeal? He's going to appeal but it's going to get thrown out immediately. He's in deep shit and he knows it. The only thing that could save him is if he wins the election, which he's not going to.

[-] soul@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Incorrect. He has to have a reason for the appeal trial to be approved. His lawyers can file an appeal on any grounds they see fit. That then has to be processed, which takes time. But I'll fall back to the answer that I already gave as well, if he's given a sentence that includes any sort of time to serve, his lawyers will use that as a basis for appeal, which is clearly stated as a possible reason for an appeal to be approved.

this post was submitted on 30 May 2024
419 points (100.0% liked)

News

23268 readers
2342 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS