Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: thegagline

If you are an attorney can you explain any of this:
He’s charged under the following statute (per the indictment)

§175.05 – 10A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the second degree
when, with intent to defraud, he:

Makes or causes a false entry in the business records of an
enterprise; or

§175.10 when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit
another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.

§200.50An indictment must contain:
7. A plain and concise factual statement in each count which, without allegations of an evidentiary nature,
(a) asserts facts supporting every element of the offense charged and the defendant’s or defendants’ commission thereof with sufficient precision to clearly apprise the defendant or defendants of the conduct which is the subject of the accusation; and

As far as I can tell, there are at least 3 elements:

1. false statement
2. intent to defraud
3. intent to commit or conceal another crime.

The indictment only addresses the false statement. Who did he defraud by calling it a legal expense? and of what?


19 posted on 04/22/2024 12:06:08 PM PDT by ALPAPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: ALPAPilot

Here’s another NY defense attorney, but his website correctly cites NY law as it is being charged against PDT.

https://www.new-york-lawyers.org/falsifying-business-records-ny-pl-175-10-and-175-15.html


22 posted on 04/22/2024 12:11:17 PM PDT by Bob Wills is still the king (Just a Texas Playboy at heart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: ALPAPilot

But we know the fraud. Trump is trying to steal an election by runnning for office and getting elected when the deep state has found that this is a fraud because he is not qualified to be President because well he is a fraud.


23 posted on 04/22/2024 12:15:25 PM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: ALPAPilot
Here is a copy of the thirty-four count indictment
https://manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Donald-J.-Trump-Indictment.pdf

As for the “facts” that allegedly satisfy the elements of the statutes cited in the indictment, take at look at the “Statement of Facts” in this case
https://manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/2023-04-04-SOF.pdf

After reviewing the Indictment and the Statement of Facts, it appears that the prosecution's case is both legally and substantively untenable. Keep in mind that the Statement of Facts is generally the bare minimum needed to satisfy the elements of the salient statutes. However here, the bare minimum is not enough to satisfy due process- the State must have both a legal and factual basis for its claims against the defendant.

I hope that helps. Cheers!

32 posted on 04/22/2024 12:47:11 PM PDT by thegagline (Sic semper tyrannis! Goldwater & Thomas Sowell in 2024)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson