It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why Trump has a bench trial rather than a jury trial

page: 7
7
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 13 2023 @ 02:37 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

The purpose of the law is consumer protection. It's meant to keep unscrupulous businesses from operating in New York in an attempt to protect the people of New York from swindlers and conmen.



posted on Oct, 13 2023 @ 02:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Threadbare

So of all the business being done in NYC, only Trump is doing it fraudulently?

Or has this law been applied to others in the same light as it is here?

(again, if you don't know, please say so, the pretending thing is played.)



posted on Oct, 13 2023 @ 03:37 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Exxon, UBS, AIG, and Martin Shkreli are some of the big names the law has been leveled against.

It's also the law that led to the dissolution of the Trump Foundation and Trump's payout for Trump University.



posted on Oct, 13 2023 @ 03:44 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Very good question. I know, that in some capacity, Donald Trump has done some shady things. He built skyscrapers in NY. He had too.

However, like you said, in this case there is no one harmed publicly. I cannot see who he defrauded or how the state of NY was defrauded.

If you are going to bring case bring something.



posted on Oct, 13 2023 @ 08:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Threadbare

That is how I understand it as well. But that needs to be focused on just how the consumers of New York have been injured by Trump's monetary evaluations. I"m just trying to understand this, cuz I don't.



posted on Oct, 14 2023 @ 04:29 AM
link   
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

They don't need to show damages. They just need to show a persistent history of fraud.



posted on Oct, 14 2023 @ 02:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Threadbare

I know that that is the case it is said that the prosecution is using. That is how I have understood it however there are so many insistent that a specific injury must be established.

We hear a lot about ''look at all the others that have been doing this kind of stuff for years'' so why only try Trump and not them. I'm thinking this could be a preventative law, to help prevent those who would attempt fraud in the future.



posted on Oct, 15 2023 @ 05:51 AM
link   
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

The law isn't that uncommon for prosecutors to use. Some of the bigger names it's been wielded against are Exxon, AIG, UBS, and Martin Shkreli. It's the same law that was used to fine Trump University and shut down Trump Foundation.

New York's Supreme Court has ruled previously that the prosecution does not need to show any injury. They just have to show a history of persistent attempts at fraud.




top topics



 
7
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join