323
Trump trial: Prosecutors withhold witness lineup from former president’s team (gazette.com)
submitted 7 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
40 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Prosecutors made the unusual decision this week to remain almost entirely mum about the order in which they planned to call their first witnesses in former President Donald Trump’s hush money trial in New York.

Joshua Steinglass, a prosecutor working on behalf of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, said Friday evening he would let Trump’s attorneys know the name of their first witness on Sunday night, the day before opening arguments in the case are set to begin, according to a report from the courtroom. Trump's defense team had asked for the names of the first three witnesses that prosecutors would call.

…

“Mr. Trump has been tweeting about the witnesses," Steinglass told Judge Juan Merchan. "We’re not telling them who the witnesses are.”

Blanche then asked Merchan if he could have the information if he promised Trump would not post on social media about the witnesses, to which Merchan replied that he did not believe Blanche could make such a vow.

top 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] qwertyqwertyqwerty@lemmy.one 161 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Blanche then asked Merchan if he could have the information if he promised Trump would not post on social media about the witnesses, to which Merchan replied that he did not believe Blanche could make such a vow.

Agree to the terms, and then when Trump inevitably intimidates the first witness, throw his ass in jail until the trail is over. I don't understand why they have to continue to give him special treatment for every single step of the trial. Either the trial process was never meant to handle all possible types of defendants, or it's being applied differently to this case. If it's the former, overhaul the judicial system to make it fit all types of cases, if it's the latter, throw the case to another court where it will be applied equally.

[-] ringwraithfish@startrek.website 75 points 7 months ago

I get the feeling they're trying to avoid martyrdom. He needs to go to prison for the big things, not on technicalities.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 81 points 7 months ago

I don't know, witness intimidation is pretty damn big. And a pretty damn big admission of guilt.

[-] Skua@kbin.social 17 points 7 months ago

The thing is, he wouldn't do it openly. He'd pass the names to an assistant who would make some anonymous posts online and let it go from there. Sure, maybe that can be proven in another trial, but that's too far away to help the witnesses or to avoid slowing this case

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 27 points 7 months ago

You're talking about the guy who just says whatever the hell is on his mind at the time.

[-] jkrtn@lemmy.ml 21 points 7 months ago

He is too stupid to keep his mouth shut. The problem is the courts are too cowardly to enforce their own gag orders.

"Please stop tweeting about the clerks and family members of the court." [He immediately tweets about the clerks and family members.] "Oh, ok, please have a 10 day extension and we'll give you a far lesser bond."

[-] CareHare@sh.itjust.works 7 points 7 months ago

Once you put it like that, it's just laughable how much they've pampered this asshole. And he still. Fucking. Complains.

[-] azimir@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 months ago

The entire right wing and Christian movements in the US seems to be based on nothing on persecution syndrome. It's just moaning about how oppressed they are day in an day out.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

he wouldn't do it openly

...where have you been for the past 7 years plus change?

He does MOST of his crimes openly and the rest he publicly brags about later!

There's literally NO way he'd ever try to make his witness tampering discreet. That would be like expecting Guy Fieri to cook without ketchup 😛

[-] qwertyqwertyqwerty@lemmy.one 30 points 7 months ago

People only need to go to jail or prison for crimes. Witness intimidation is a crime.

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 3 points 7 months ago

The thing is where will you house the orange asshole's Secret Service detail in a prison?

That's gotta be a huge drawback for any judge to send him to prison during a trial.

[-] snooggums@midwest.social 19 points 7 months ago

Insurrectionists don't deserve secret service protection.

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 11 points 7 months ago

If a U.S. President Goes to Prison, Does the Secret Service Go, Too?

Under current United States federal law, all former presidents are entitled to lifetime protection from the Secret Service. Barring an act of Congress or a presidential executive order, the Secret Service is bound by law to protect former presidents for life. There aren't any exceptions listed in the statute governing the protection of former presidents.

Trump's various indictments have left many wondering if the Secret Service would accompany Trump (or any other convicted former president) to prison.

"Yes, no question," said Ronald Kessler, author of two books about the Secret Service: "In the President's Secret Service" and "The First Family Detail." "There wouldn't be a Secret Service agent inside his cell, but I expect that there would be two agents outside of his cell, two agents in the corridor leading up to the cell block and another two agents at the entrance to the prison."

Other commentators, including a former Secret Service agent, have said that as few as two Secret Service agents could be posted at the prison, but Kessler called that "crazy."

*** There are multiple links in the article that I haven't transferred here.

[-] borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 7 months ago

Personally I think that any former president who winds up incarcerated should have to serve their time in the military side of Leavenworth, but that’s just me. The Secret Service would have a much easier time integrating into a system run by MPs than civilian prison guards.

[-] mPony@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

There's got to be a spare supply closet somewhere: use that. and make sure they don't use Epstein-brand video cameras.

[-] snooggums@midwest.social 3 points 7 months ago

"Don't deserve" is a completely different thing that "Won't get" which seems important to point out because your response is about the latter.

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I copied portions of an article. I wasn't personally choosing deserve or get.

[-] snooggums@midwest.social 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Then why did you choose those specific quotes as a response to my statement about not deserving?

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 3 points 7 months ago

Because the federal rules were in it. Deserving or undeserving has little to do with it then.

[-] qwertyqwertyqwerty@lemmy.one 8 points 7 months ago

Is that something for a judge to take into consideration though, or for a warden?

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

They sit outside the cell, obviously.

[-] Kalysta@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago

Why would he need a secret service detail? He has prison guards.

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 months ago

So did Epstein and they didn't save him.

[-] snooggums@midwest.social 17 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

He needs to not be treated like a fucking king because he isn't one. Presidents are just people who happen to be elected, and shouldn't get treated like royalty.

Worrying about making him a martyr is counterproductive.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

Presidents are just people who happen to be elected

Some of them not even that, such as himself and first term Dubya.

[-] LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

He is already claiming to be a martyr since being charged for all the civil and criminal indictments

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 31 points 7 months ago

why they have to continue to give him special treatment for every single step

Because the US "justice" system is very conservative and Frank Wilhoit was absolutely right in this characterization:

Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition ... There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect

Trump is in the in-group no matter what and anyone who displeases the fascist man-child and his cult in any way is in the out-group. No matter what.

[-] this_1_is_mine@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago

There's this but also they have to give him every possible consideration because any possibility where they end up having any kind of misstep gives him the opportunity for either a mistrial or to have the whole damn thing thrown out on appeal so they have to make sure they get their ducks in a row perfectly before doing absolutely anything. Otherwise you're going to have that little dehydrated mango get off and be out and running around on atechnicalityy.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago

they have to give him every possible consideration

No they don't. They pretend that they do but they actually don't.

any possibility where they end up having any kind of misstep gives him the opportunity for either a mistrial or to have the whole damn thing thrown out

You don't get a mistrial for your actions having the consequences prescribed by the law.

I know it feels like that because everyone has adopted the media's deference to lunatics and crooks, but you cannot get a mistrial without an extremely serious breech of rules.

It's an excuse for treating him with kid gloves, not a valid reason for doing so.

they have to make sure they get their ducks in a row perfectly before doing absolutely anything

They really don't, no. This isn't Congress where you just make up the rules yourself as you go along. This is a court of law where what you can and cannot do is clearly defined. That can not only bind you from misconduct but also protect you from negative consequences of following the rules.

Otherwise you're going to have that little dehydrated mango get off and be out and running around on atechnicalityy.

That's not how "getting off on a technicality" works. For that to happy, someone has to make a mistake that is against the rule. Holding him accountable for his words and actions according to the letter of the law can't set him free.

I'm frankly sick and tired of everyone using that completely invalid excuse every time he shits on the whole concept of law and a just society without incurring any consequences.

ENOUGH!

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

You don't get a mistrial for your actions having the consequences prescribed by the law.

Unless you have a really good lawyer. But none of them will work for him at this point.

[-] Today@lemmy.world 14 points 7 months ago

It sucks, but I don't believe anything will happen to him. The secret service will never let him go to jail with the commoners. The best we can hope for is house arrest, frozen assets, and limited WiFi. He will stil run for office and his people will vote for him. It would make a funny tv show to have a president who couldn't leave his home and had every visitor and phone call vetted and monitored.

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

The secret service will never let him go to jail with the commoners.

There's a motion being proposed to remove secret service for any individual who gets themselves convicted of a felony.

Of course the Republicans will ensure that it will fail to be passed, but it's still an interesting thing to think about.

[-] Lemmy_Cook@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

Funny on TV, not in real life 😭

[-] Seleni@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

Well, at least then maybe his communications detail could keep him and his cronies on encrypted systems. I know someone who worked on his detail, and they were always chasing Trump’s people down to stop them from using unapproved unsecured channels.

[-] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

The secret service will never let him go to jail with the commoners.

He can go to a military prison where it wont be an issue. Throw him in solitary or under armed guard and he can waste away his life reading cat and the hat and other reading level appropriate books.

[-] jkrtn@lemmy.ml 10 points 7 months ago

The won't give him the contempt of court charges he deserves. Acknowledging that at least allows them to make better decisions even if they aren't doing the right thing.

Fuck this two tiered justice bullshit.

[-] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

The rich and powerful never get treated with the same distain and lack of dignity that the non-wealthy in this country are treated with in our fucked up judicial system. And Trump has proven it over and over again as he never sees any real consequences for what he's done.

[-] snooggums@midwest.social 56 points 7 months ago

The real solution would be for the judge to issue a gag order that would automatically result in Trump being thrown in Riker's if he violates it. He has had more than enough unenforced warnings across his trials that immediate contempt of court and incarceration would be reasonable in a just world.

Unfortunately we live in this one where he will only get a limited amount of time to intimidate witnesses.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 44 points 7 months ago

Trump being thrown in Riker’s

Which would result in me posting Riker...

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

I’ll allow it.

this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2024
323 points (100.0% liked)

News

23353 readers
2875 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
rjc@lemmy.world
Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
JonsJava@lemmy.world
gedaliyah@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
jeffw@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world