• News Categories
    ▼
    • Surveillance & Technology
    • U.S. News & Reports
    • International News
    • Finance
    • Defense & Security
    • Politics
    • Videos
  • Blog
  • Directory
  • Support Us
  • About
  • Contact

T-Room

The Best in Alternative News

  • News Categories
    • Surveillance & Technology
    • U.S. News & Reports
    • International News
    • Finance
    • Defense & Security
    • Politics
    • Videos
  • Blog
  • Directory
  • Support Us
  • About
  • Contact

June 17, 2024 at 6:45 pm

A Glaring Error in Trump’s Hush Money Trial…

Donald_Trump_Manhattan_Court_Arraignment_04042023_GettyImages
ParlerGabTruth Social

by Clark Neily at Washington Examiner

A New York jury acquitted publisher John Peter Zenger of seditious libel in 1735 in what the National Constitution Center correctly calls “an early example of jury nullification.” Three centuries later, another New York jury was falsely instructed that it lacked that power, thereby rendering its guilty verdict against another high-profile defendant, former President Donald Trump, constitutionally infirm.

Juries have always had the power to acquit against the evidence, and telling them otherwise violates the Sixth Amendment and due process.

The jury instructions given in Trump’s hush money prosecution advised jurors that “if the People satisfy their burden of proof, you must find the defendant guilty.” Though apparently standard in New York, the italicized language flatly contradicts founding-era theory and practice regarding the prerogatives of criminal juries. (By contrast, the jury instructions in the Hunter Biden prosecution told the jurors they “should” convict if the state carried its burden, not that they must.)

It is axiomatic that judges should not mislead jurors about their actual duties and powers. For example, if a judge instructed a jury that only registered Republicans and Democrats could speak during deliberations, its verdict would be invalid because the Constitution requires that all jurors have the opportunity to participate. Other requirements include the correct number of jurors (12, not six, as Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch keeps reminding his colleagues), unanimity, and nondiscrimination in selection. The fact that those requirements are derived from historical practice rather than express textual command renders them no less binding.

Another historical attribute of criminal juries is the power to acquit against the evidence,…

ParlerGabTruth Social
Continue Reading
This website lives off the kindness of your donations. If you would like to support The T-Room please visit our PayPal.

Editor’s Picks

Incredible Story: Hero Dad Dives into Sea to Save Daughter Who Fell from Disney Dream Cruise — Treading Water for 20 Minutes Before Being Pulled to Safety….

National Health Care Fraud Takedown Results in 324 Defendants Charged in Connection with Over $14.6 Billion in Alleged Fraud…

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent Explains Severity of Response to Canada’s Digital Services Tax…

Supreme Court Nukes Nationwide Injunctions Against Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order…

House Republicans Subpoena ActBlue Officials over Alleged Fraud…

Any publication posted at The T-Room and/or opinions expressed therein do not necessarily reflect the views of The T-Room. Such publications and all information within the publications (e.g. titles, dates, statistics, conclusions, sources, opinions, etc) are solely the responsibility of the author of the article, not The T-Room.

Twitter Icon

View Old Archives

Copyright © 2025 T-Room

Site by Creative Visual Design