Donald Trump to appear by video as judge reinforces ban on attacking witnesses
Source: AP
By MICHAEL R. SISAK today
NEW YORK (AP) The judge in Donald Trumps criminal case is holding a hybrid hearing Tuesday to make doubly sure the former president is aware of new rules barring him from using evidence to attack witnesses.
Trump wont have to show up to court for the afternoon hearing at a Manhattan courthouse, avoiding the mammoth security and logistical challenges that accompanied his arraignment last month.
Instead, the Republican will be connected by video conference, with his face beamed onto courtroom TV monitors. His lawyers and prosecutors must still appear in person.
.....................
Trump is allowed to speak publicly about the case, but he risks being held in contempt if he uses evidence turned over by prosecutors in the pretrial discovery process to target witnesses or others involved in the case.
....................
......................
Merchan, noting Trumps special status as a former president and current candidate, has made clear that the protective order shouldnt be construed as a gag order and that Trump has a right to publicly defend himself...............................
Read more: https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-criminal-case-manhattan-cc2dbf565678eeaf8246a96b0fd1f461?utm_source=RecoReel&utm_medium=articlePage&utm_id=Taboola
Link to tweet
?s=20
FILE - Former President Donald Trump sits at the defense table with his legal team in a Manhattan court, Tuesday, April 4, 2023, in New York. The judge in Donald Trump's criminal case is holding a hybrid hearing Tuesday to make doubly sure the former president is aware of new rules barring him from using evidence to attack witnesses. Trump is allowed to speak publicly about the case, but he risks being held in contempt if he uses evidence turned over by prosecutors in the pretrial discovery process to target witnesses or others involved in the case. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig, Pool)
1 of 4
Beachnutt
(8,910 posts)Nobody is above the law.
Maybe I can attend a court hearing via zoom someday if I break the law...
It'd be a lot of expense and trouble for me to show up in person.
Alexander Of Assyria
(7,839 posts)msfiddlestix
(8,178 posts)The Law is only KING for the lowly masses. No gag order is being issued as stated in the article, because of his "special statius" as former president and current campaign. REALLY??????
This judge knows damn well this psychopath isn't going to abide by this order. He will continue to attack and intimidate witnesses. Warnings in this case are toothless. He should have already been held in contempt. the order given before was clear.
Instead, he's being given special treatment because of his "special statuts".
Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)Can you be specific as to incident and dates and quotes as to why he should be held in contempt on Bragg's case? Or perhaps not.
Alexander Of Assyria
(7,839 posts)Elementary law 101.
PatSeg
(53,214 posts)of making certain exceptions for someone who is a former President of the United States, as long as they are still held accountable for any crimes they may have committed. In this case, the allowances made were not necessarily for Trump's convenience, but for obvious security concerns.
Of course, there is a certain satisfaction seeing him appear in court and I am hopeful we'll see that more than once in the near future.
Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)Careful what you wish for lest you be required to receive instruction by video link from a judge.
Marthe48
(23,175 posts)Appear in person, covering orange with orange, shackles, no bail.
Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(179,871 posts)newdayneeded
(2,493 posts)he can't keep his ugly mouth shut!
deelee
(41 posts)...and so far it's worked, as there's been no repercussions.
I'm not convinced this time will be any different
PatSeg
(53,214 posts)Once he starts talking, he just can't stop. I've known people like that, though he is ten times worse than any of them. He thinks he can talk his way out of anything, but it doesn't work that way in a court of law, especially when you're under oath.
Response to riversedge (Original post)
AllaN01Bear This message was self-deleted by its author.
marble falls
(71,936 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)This is not a trial.
This is one way, Judge to obstreperous person. The Judge has wisely chosen an efficient way to communicate instructions and receive acknowledgement that they are heard and understood.
getagrip_already
(17,802 posts)Tfg: ?
It will be interesting how he responds to a direct statement to acknowledge restrictions.
A smart person would say "yes, your honor". A jerk would say "yes." Tfg will say?
moniss
(9,056 posts)attack the witnesses etc. and claim none of what he is doing came from any of the evidence. I understand what the judge is doing but we all know what's coming. Just like in the case of E.Jean Carroll where right after being found guilty of defamation he goes and does it some more. If you lose a case like that you can be sure one of your attorneys is going to advise you that going forward you should keep your mouth shut about anything to do with that person. But he won't listen to any attorney who doesn't tell him what he wants to hear. That's his history. Look at his statements about any of the other cases/investigators/prosecutors. He goes immediately to insulting their families, spouses etc. He understands that so many of his minions have the maturity of a 10 year old and the playground bully routine rings true for them.