- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
Alternate news organization: https://apnews.com/article/trump-hush-money-sentencing-bragg-4d5f8ce399656abff72d7c114a04060d
Alternate news organization: https://apnews.com/article/trump-hush-money-sentencing-bragg-4d5f8ce399656abff72d7c114a04060d
Is it typical for a lawyer to, partly, build a case using things that happened after the person did what they were accused of doing?
Assuming this is fine and normal, this would mean they would need to first get judicial review to determine if the incidents they’re citing are ‘core’ (Article II) official acts or not. Peripheral official acts, assuming a judge demes them to be, would certainly be admissible.
Yes, post-offence conduct is commonly used as circumstantial evidence in trial. Regarding the hush money case, I think a big goal for Trump’s team is to delay the sentencing until after the election.