#Prosecution

[maspers]

How to be a successful Ace Attorney Prosecutor:

Step 1) Pass the Bar exam. This is presumably very easy, considering how young some of the lawyers and prosecutors are in the series. They hand those badges out like hotcakes. Presumably it's part of Themis Legal Academy's graduation package, so you might not even have to TAKE the bar exam! Step 2) Only take murder cases. This will probably happen to you regardless of whether you want it to or not, so I'm including it in the list so you feel like you have SOME control over your life. Step 3) Be an honest and morally good person who seeks for truth and justice above all else in court. This one isn't TECHNICALLY mandatory, but eventually you'll end up facing off against someone from the Wright Anything Agency and once they're involved you'd better get on the level fast, or you risk either humiliation or being arrested for murder. Better to get this one out of the way sooner rather than later. Step 4) Pay the Detectives. Please. Gumshoe desperately needs a raise. If you aren't going to pay your Detectives, you should at LEAST take a summer sabbatical in Europe. Germany would be best. Step 5) This is very important: Be a sadist. Just a bit. Be a troll. A gremlin. A deranged little maniac. You're going to be watching a lot of people suffer on the witness stand (and behind the Defense's bench), and if you don't enjoy watching that happen then you're in for a very miserable career. Might as well get SOME entertainment out of it. Trust me, if you aren't capable of making Phoenix Wright recoil in fear, you're doing your job wrong.

[somethingusefulfromflorida]

Trump has so many charges against him that he's almost certainly going to be convicted of something. Not everything, probably not even a majority, but something. He knows he won't get unanimous acquittals across the board, so his only hope will be to slip loyalists onto some of the juries to hang them. A mistrial means months or years of delays as prosecution works each case through the system all over again.

In New York, he'd be retried over and over until a unanimous verdict is reached, guilty or not guilty, however long that takes, and every state level Republican candidate from now on will campaign on promises to drop the charges or pardon him or help him in some way, shape, or form.

In Georgia (he hasn't been indicted yet, but it's coming), he's going to be pardoned almost immediately. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if he gets pardoned before it even goes to trial. Yeah, the governor refused to find 11,000 votes for him, but he's still a Republican and trump is still the leader of his party. If he didn't pardon trump, he would be crucified by his voters and shamed out of office, and his successor would pardon him instead. If he stood his ground and couldn't be bullied into resigning, then just as in New York every Republican candidate would run on the pardon promise platform. Trump will NEVER face justice in Georgia.

In the federal case in Florida, a mistrial means the judge, a trump appointee, could drop the charges and prevent the DOJ from retrying it. Best case scenario, it would get delayed into 2025 or 2026 and a different judge in the southern district of Florida will be randomly assigned to it, but that's assuming Biden wins re-election in 2024. If trump wins, he'd immediately pardon himself, or invoke the 25th to have his loyalist VP pardon him to avoid a Supreme Court decision on a self-pardon's validity. If Biden wins, the 2028 Republican candidates will all run on promises to pardon him, so he'll be out of prison the second the White House goes red. I don't trust Democrats to hold the line long enough for him to die in prison.

The federal case in Washington, DC looks open and shut, the best chance for a conviction. Trump only has four appointees in that district, so the odds of him getting off on a retrial in case of a hung jury are 4 in 13, 30.77% (4/15, 26.67% if Biden can fill the two remaining vacancies). Again, all this does is kick the can down the road until 2025 or 2026. He will walk free whenever the Republicans take back power.

The only way donald trump faces long term consequences for his crimes is if New York stays solid blue for the rest of his life, something like the next 15 or 20 years. The federal charges will disappear the second one of his allies gets elected president; I don't think the party would nominate him for a fourth time in 2028 if he loses 2024 for them, so it's looking like it's gonna be ron desantis vs Kamala Harris (God help us all). Then again, who knows? A lot can happen in the next 5 years, so maybe some nobody will be frontrunner by then and desantis will have slinked away into post-gubernatorial obscurity like Jeb and Charlie Crist. Whoever trump endorses will be the nominee, so whoever strokes his ego the hardest will have hometeam advantage. My money says it'll be some blonde woman or a lightskinned black guy for diversity points (whoever it is, they'll be even farther right than trump himself)

[lawbyrhys]

Stop Calling Kamala Harris "Copmala" Already!

I keep seeing the name "Copmala" being thrown around to refer to the presumptive Democratic Presidential nominee, Kamala Harris; can we nip that shit in the bud already? Not only is this name-calling childish, unproductive, and an overall Trumpian thing to do, but it's not even true. Kamala Harris was never a police officer; she was a prosecutor and an attorney general.

Let's get into the truth of the matter, shall we?

Let's go over some simple definitions real quick.

Police Officer: A person whose job is to enforce laws, investigate crimes, and make arrests : a member of the police. Also called cop.

Prosecutor: A person, especially a public official, who institutes legal proceedings against someone. A lawyer who conducts the case against a defendant in a criminal court. A legal representative of the prosecution, also called a prosecuting attorney or district attorney.

Attorney General: The principal legal officer who represents a country or a state in legal proceedings and gives legal advice to the government.

With these terms clearly defined, let's briefly discuss who Kamala Harris is by clarifying the roles she held before holding office as Vice President and her current prospective role as the presumptive Democratic Presidential nominee.

Kamala Harris was a courtroom prosecutor, also known as a prosecuting attorney, district attorney, or more simply known as a prosecutor.

Kamala Harris was not a police officer.

Now, if we want to discuss the relationship between the two roles, we can, and we will now.

Prosecutors provide the police with legal advice as it pertains to criminal cases, as well as training the police in securing warrants, making arrests, and the interrogation process; they make sure it is all done ethically and most importantly legally. Police officers, in turn, assist the prosecution by gathering and investigating evidence, as well as giving their testimony in court. They work together, but they're not the same and should never be referred to as such.

In short, police collect and hand over the evidence for the prosecution to then argue against the defense in a court of law.

Kamala Harris worked in collaboration with police to build and argue cases, but she was never a police officer by any means.

Am I saying everything she did was perfect? No. What I am saying is that she did her job as a prosecuting attorney, and the same can be said about her role as Attorney General of California.

I'm not defending all prosecutors, either; I almost always refrain from speaking in absolutes. That said, though, it's a topic that keeps getting presented in these high-stakes matters, and since I know about the topic, I think it's fair to present the information as a means to educate and inform those who do not have an understanding of the legal world.

[commiepinkofag]

Court cases are starting to increase in Russia since the 'extremist' designation & bar raids in Moscow.

-a two million rubles fines for a movie being shown -jail time for rainbow frogs

you can follow the fucked up impacts of this legislation here. [goo]

The case of "demonstration of the symbols of an extremist organization" for the rainbow flag.

A Russian court has sentenced 33-year-old artist, Irina Mossina, to a fine for publishing a photo with a rainbow flag on the online service Instagram. The photographer had to pay 1,500 rubles [~15€ / 17$] because she posted "the symbol of an extremist organization," the non-governmental organization Pervyj Otdel and Russian media reported on Monday.

Mediazone [Russian]

[harriswalz4usabybr]

Speech Vice President Harris gave at Bozeman United Methodist Church!

[tomorrowusa]

The Nazi régime in Germany fell in 1945. Its criminals are still being prosecuted.

From June 1943 to April 1945, she worked as a stenographer and typist  at the Stutthof death camp, near what was then Nazi-occupied Danzig and is now Gdansk.An estimated 65,000 people died at Stutthof, including Jewish prisoners, Polish partisans and Soviet Russian prisoners of war.

The prosecution had said the defendant's clerical work "assured the smooth running of the camp" and gave her "knowledge of all occurrences and events at Stutthof."

Defense attorneys had called for their client to be found not guilty, arguing she was unaware of the scope of the murder and crimes committed at the camp.

The judges in the case had visited the former Stutthof camp to clarify which areas she could see from her office at the time. They concluded that it was "simply beyond imagination" that she had not noticed the mass killings.

"During her time at Stutthof, the defendant did not remain unaware of what was happening there," Dominik Groß, the presiding judge, said.

Irmgard F. remained silent during much of the trial, but said toward the end: "I'm sorry for everything that happened. I regret that I was in Stutthof at the time. I can't say anything else."

This should serve as a warning to Russians committing war crimes and crimes against humanity in Ukraine. They will never be let off the hook. If any are still alive in 2099, they will be prosecuted. There should be no amnesty for such crimes.

[worldwidenews29]

Latest Blog on Who Is Kamala Harris????

[immaculatasknight]

Facing consequences

[maspers]

I think it'd be amusing if there was an Ace Attorney Prosecutor who actually knew when to throw in the towel.

Murderer: This is all just hearsay! That attorney has created this elaborate story to frame me as the culprit. But there's no proof of it! You can't prove a single thing! Prosecutor: Yeah, but who cares? Murderer: What? Athena: WHAT? Judge: WHAT??? Prosecutor: The Defense doesn't need to prove who did it, she just need to prove that the Defendant didn't. Or at least shed enough reasonable doubt on the matter. And she did. I don't have any more evidence to conclusively prove the Defendant did it. So we're basically done here. Murderer: What? You're supposed to be on my side! Prosecutor: No? You're a witness, not a plaintiff. Your Honor, I think we're going to indict this witness of murdering the guy. Murderer: WHAT? WHERE'S YOUR PROOF? Prosecutor: That's for the NEXT trial to figure out. Not this one. Though I hope I get to Prosecute that one too, it seems like it will be fun! Hope your lawyer is as interesting as Miss Cykes over there has been. Murderer: NO! NONONONONONO *has a classic AA Breakdown* Prosecutor: You do realize your reaction is just incriminating you further right? Sheesh, why do none of my witnesses ever manage to keep their composure? Athena: ...Because they're guilty? Prosecutor: That's for me to prove in the next trial! Take 'em away, Bailiff! Judge: This is... highly irregular- Prosecutor: This is literally what we're supposed to be doing. Judge: Errr I guess the Court finds the Defendant Not Guilty! *confetti rains down* Athena: What just happened? Prosecutor: What just happened is you successfully proved that your client was probably innocent, and I get paid to do another trial! Thanks a bunch! Athena: ...But I did have evidence to prove that witness did it. Prosecutor: Great, can I see it? I can use it in the next trial! Athena: I'm so confused right now

[lawbyrhys]

Trump's Legal Complaint Against Harris is Total NONSENSE: Lawyer Breaks Down the Bullshit

In case you haven't heard, Donald Trump filed a legal complaint against Kamala Harris and the Democratic Party, alleging they broke federal election law when Harris received a $91.5M cut from the Biden campaign she was apart of.

Let's break down and dispute the complaint.

"Kamala Harris is seeking to perpetrate a $91.5 million dollar heist of Joe Biden’s leftover campaign cash — a brazen money grab that would constitute the single largest excessive contribution and biggest violation in the history of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended." - an excerpt of Tuesday's filings

As per the FEC, "The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended ("the Act") bans foreign nationals from making contributions either directly or through any person in connection with election to any political office. 2 U.S.C. S441e." Additionally, the law prohibits contributions to a candidate from being used for “personal use” by any person, and originally focused on creating limits for campaign spending on communication media, adding additional penalties to the criminal code for election law violations, and imposing disclosure requirements for federal political campaigns.

The filing continues with Trump claiming that the democratic pair, "flagrantly violating the Act by making and receiving an excessive contribution of nearly one hundred million dollars, and for filing fraudulent forms with the Commission purporting to repurpose one candidate’s principal campaign committee for the use of another candidate."

While Trump's counsel urge the FEC to enjoin the transfer, urging for a fine or potential criminal referral to the DOJ if the transfer is found to be unlawful, the Harris campaign has an entirely different view; a view based in legal fact. The Harris campaign views the complaint as nothing more than "a spurious legal effort to throw sand in their gears," continuing on to inform that the Biden-Harris committees have always been authorized by use for either party. The presumtive Democratic nominee's campaign raised $100M in donations in just 36 hours, releasing a statement to declare their standing that Trump's complaint is nothing more than “baseless legal claims – like the ones they’ve made for years to try to suppress votes and steal elections – will only distract them.”

I think the frivalous nature of the complaint speaks for itself, but I will state the obvious here. Does it sound like there's any foreign nationals involved here? Neither Joe Biden nor Kamala Harris are foreign nationals. Furthermore, Harris is not using any of these funds for "personal use," but rather for political campaign expenses. As Harris' name is on all the filed statements with Biden, and therefore has a legal claim to those funds, where other Democrats would not.

Addressing the disclosure requirements for federal political campaigns, I got an email to my inbox yesterday afternoon about "the truth." Enclosed with information discussing how "July is an FEC fundraising deadline month," and the campaign fully intends to abide by the above stipulations: "At the end of the month, we will be required to report how much money we've raised and how many donations we've received." I'm sure any of you who have donated to her campaign as I have, or simply signed up for her emails, received this message, too.

There's a reason Trump and his counsel did not take this complaint any further into a lawsuit; they have no standing to do so. It appears their main goal now is to do anything and everything they can to try and derail Harris' momentum, regardless of their claims' validity and legal merit.

[jbfly46]

Judge finds forensic scientist Henry Lee liable for fabricating evidence in a murder case.

[lawbyrhys]

Thank you for saying this! I have been saying the same thing to any and all who will listen. As a resident of California and a member of our State Bar, I'm really annoyed at the misinformation. I've even had a few people in my personal life refer to her incorrectly as a police officer, use the "Copmala" moniker, etc. I usually bite my tongue and move the conversation in the correct direction, but I think it's about time we nip that misinformation in the bud before it spreads even wider into the collective political zeitgeist. Again, thank you for posting this; I'm happy to repost this message.

Additionally, not to promote my own content here, but I have put together a simple breakdown of what exactly all of this means from a legal perspective. It's an educational tool that's here for anybody who may benefit from it.

Thanks again. I hope everybody has a good day.

It didn’t hit me until recently that people genuinely think Kamala Harris was a police officer because of all the people who call her a cop online.

Like I think maybe it’s important people should know she was a prosecutor. She was once a district attorney and later an attorney general for the state of California. And we can discuss how related that is to police work and how tied she is to the carceral system etc etc (but for fairness would have to include her record of pushing for lowering incarceration rates through programs helping former prisoners + her office refusing to jail folks for low level weed offense). But she was never a police officer. Like people should get that clear. Kamala Harris was never a police officer. She was a district attorney. She was never a police officer.

[trendynewsnow]

Cuomo's Testimony and Potential Legal Consequences in Nursing Home Covid Inquiry

Cuomo’s Testimony Under Scrutiny In a recent investigation, former New York Governor Andrew M. Cuomo faced tough questioning from congressional investigators regarding his involvement in an official report that sought to shift blame for the thousands of Covid-related fatalities in state nursing homes. When pressed about his role, Cuomo resorted to one of the oldest defenses in the political…

[alabs1]

Kidnapping: Absence Of Prosecution Stalls Evans’s Plea Bargain Hearing

Hearing of the plea bargain agreement entered into by convicted kidnapper, Chukwudumeme Onwuamadike (alias Evans), on Thursday, suffered a setback due to his absence. The prosecution counsel and Evans’s co-defendant, Joseph Emeka, were also absent. When the case was called, counsel to Emeka, Nelson Onyejaka, told the court that he was surprised that prosecution counsel and the first defendant’s…

[slayer992277]

!