This Trial is helping Trump immensely, if he gets acquitted

[FAUlty Gator]

What is the other crime they've proven? What's the statute? They've made a case for falsifying business records from 2016. Those are misdemeanors, and the statute of limitations has run out. To bring this to trial, those charges had to be elevated to felonies, and that is they were crimes committed in furtherance to another crime. So what's the additional crime? It will have to be a NY state crime.

Not only that, but they also have to believe and prove that Trump knew about that specific NY state election law and was acting in a manner to avoid getting caught breaking that law...which was a misdemeanor.

 

[Rifler]

If this doesn't end with a directed verdict by the judge and actually goes to the jury, it will be very interesting to see just how the judge directs the jury prior to deliberation....

 

[NoleinATL]

They can't ask for lesser included charges when the statute of limitations has run out on those charges unless the defense is willing to waive the statute of limitations. That would require a plea deal, but wouldn't be an option for the jury.

That may be true, I commented based on what I read in an article before the trial that suggested that was an option, it was in Politico

Under New York law, the defense can make this request at any point before the jury gets the case for deliberations. The judge is supposed to then determine whether there is a “reasonable view” of the evidence that indicates that the defendant committed the lesser included offenses but not the greater ones. In Trump’s case, the argument would be that jurors could reasonably conclude on the basis of the evidence that Trump committed the misdemeanor offenses of falsifying his company’s business records but not the charged felony offenses — which require prosecutors to establish that Trump intended to commit or conceal another crime.


Just to fact-check Politico I googled the law and a Brennan Center for Justice article suggests the same

What if Trump is convicted of misdemeanor rather than felony charges?​

This scenario has received little attention but is worth mentioning. Trump can be convicted of the misdemeanor charges of falsifying business records even though the indictment only charges him with felony counts.

Typically, before a judge reads instructions to the jurors ahead of their deliberations, the court holds a conference with the attorneys to discuss what charges the jury will be asked to consider. At that point, the prosecution or the defense could ask Merchan to charge what is considered the “lesser included offenses” and read the jurors the elements of the misdemeanor crime of falsifying business records along with the felony crime. The judge would then instruct the jurors that they can also choose to convict the defendant on just the misdemeanor charges.

If found guilty of a misdemeanor, Trump would still be subject to penalties, including jail time. Because a misdemeanor is a less serious criminal offense than a felony, the sentence could consist of up to one year in a local jail, probation, fines, or other penalties.

 

[fakenewsking]

If this doesn't end with a directed verdict by the judge and actually goes to the jury, it will be very interesting to see just how the judge directs the jury prior to deliberation....

One of the few people that actually asked a normal question. Look at Texas Ag's forum https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3455338/90 Third from the bottom will help you out.

 

[Finance85]

That may be true, I commented based on what I read in an article before the trial that suggested that was an option, it was in Politico

Under New York law, the defense can make this request at any point before the jury gets the case for deliberations. The judge is supposed to then determine whether there is a “reasonable view” of the evidence that indicates that the defendant committed the lesser included offenses but not the greater ones. In Trump’s case, the argument would be that jurors could reasonably conclude on the basis of the evidence that Trump committed the misdemeanor offenses of falsifying his company’s business records but not the charged felony offenses — which require prosecutors to establish that Trump intended to commit or conceal another crime.


Just to fact-check Politico I googled the law and a Brennan Center for Justice article suggests the same

What if Trump is convicted of misdemeanor rather than felony charges?​

This scenario has received little attention but is worth mentioning. Trump can be convicted of the misdemeanor charges of falsifying business records even though the indictment only charges him with felony counts.

Typically, before a judge reads instructions to the jurors ahead of their deliberations, the court holds a conference with the attorneys to discuss what charges the jury will be asked to consider. At that point, the prosecution or the defense could ask Merchan to charge what is considered the “lesser included offenses” and read the jurors the elements of the misdemeanor crime of falsifying business records along with the felony crime. The judge would then instruct the jurors that they can also choose to convict the defendant on just the misdemeanor charges.

If found guilty of a misdemeanor, Trump would still be subject to penalties, including jail time. Because a misdemeanor is a less serious criminal offense than a felony, the sentence could consist of up to one year in a local jail, probation, fines, or other penalties.

The statute of limitations has run out on the misdemeanors. Trump can't be charged with a crime if the statute of limitations has expired. That's the very reason why he's been charged with the felony, which requires the additional crime.

The Statute of Limitations for the 34 counts expired 4 months before these charges were brought.

Syracuse Law discussion of the case

The lesser of included could only happen if the misdemeanor charges had been filed before the statute of limitations expired.

 

[Chishawk1425]

 

[fsu1jreed]

Well...if he doesn't get off he probably goes to jail. I thought him going to jail would be an obvious thing that would not help him.

Hold up.... you're under the impression that any course of action could help him?