“Saying he influenced an election illegally but providing no statute that was violated while influencing said election? How can a jury decide a case without a law. What law are they supposed to apply the evidence to??”
Don’t get too hung up on this.
Prosecuting a black man for raping a white woman in rural Mississippi in 1868 had little to do with law or facts.
Same strategy here. Try someone you hate in a place where everyone already intensely dislikes him and thinks he is guilty of something or the other. And then throw a bunch of feces up against the wall. Law and facts don’t matter much.
You have a judge who is either scared to buck the hatred or he is caught up in the lynching enthusiasm and a jury that is ready to lynch.
1868 Mississippi was under federal occupation
Poor example
Prosecuting a black man for raping a white woman in rural Mississippi in 1868 had little to do with law or facts.