Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "Trump, The Felon; X-Sphere Goes WILD Over GUILTY Verdict; Crowds ERUPT Outside NYC Court" video.

  1. So why shouldn't the prosecution *have* to prove exactly that -- the predicate intent to commit some definite offense? I mean, if they could prove that beyond reasonable doubt, no problem. But somehow, that didn't happen. Somehow. /s
    1
  2. ​ @Mark-zx2bq  No, he was right about this. The judge instructs on the law, the jury alone determines what the facts are. The only "legal expert" in any trial IS the judge. BTW, interesting that the Harvey Weinstein verdict was just overturned on appeal. That's what happens when trial judges make errors of law, or juries behave with extreme irrationality, "prejudice or passion."
    1
  3. ​​ @Mark-zx2bq Not exactly. An expert cannot draw the legal conclusions that are the province of the jury. Actually, he went too far in stating what expert witnesses can testify about. Please look it up. I did say where, but . . . Well. Better not say more, lol.
    1
  4.  @Mark-zx2bq  FWIW, I think this verdict will be overturned, eventually. Maybe by 2032, lol.
    1
  5.  @Mark-zx2bq  "How to Avoid Accusations That Your Expert Witness Offered Legal Conclusions" is a good place to look. Free handouts and everything.
    1
  6.  @Mark-zx2bq  The authoritative ref I gave is, of course, not here. This is how things go now.
    1
  7.  @Mark-zx2bq  You caught my drift, no?
    1
  8.  @Mark-zx2bq  I substantiated my assertion with a very good reference. But posts with references are disfavored.
    1
  9. @Mark-zx2bq  You don't catch on too well, huh? 🤣🤡🌎 That could pose communications issues for you, in the current climate.
    1
  10.  @Mark-zx2bq  A person who approves of censorship when it appears to favor "his side" . . . That says it all.
    1
  11.  @Mark-zx2bq  Guess who is blocked from my notifications thread?
    1