There’s a lot of talk from the right about a “rigged” trial and a verdict of guilty that was set up from the start in this case. In that rhetoric they present the notion that the trial was managed by the Biden White House and not the Manhattan District Attorney. They have no proof to offer in support of that claim but that hasn’t stopped them in the past.
Alvan Bragg took office on January 1, 2022 after the voters of New York County elected him to replace a retiring Cyrus Vance. He was handed the remains of several investigations into The Trump Organization and Donald Trump himself. Three years earlier, Donald Trump’s lawyer and “fixer” had gone to jail for making unlawful campaign contributions to the Trump presidential campaign. In the indictment of Cohen, the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York had referenced Donald Trump as Individual-1. He was a part, if not the instigator, of a scheme to keep a couple of women from making their claims about affairs with him Public.
Vance gave several reasons for not pursuing an indictment of Trump using similar charges to those Cohen plead guilty to. Essentially, though, he said he wanted to focus on the financial crimes of the Trump Organization. In December of 2022 a Manhattan jury found two Trump Organization companies guilty on multiple charges of criminal tax fraud and falsifying business records. They were connected to a 15-year scheme to defraud tax authorities by failing to report and pay taxes on compensation for top executives. While that was going on Bragg, who had replaced Vance, was also pursuing the charges against Trump that Vance had passed on. As a result we now have an ex-President who is a convicted felon.
The idea that the trial was rigged is being promoted by Trump and his acolytes without offering any actual reason to believe it’s true. The one claim you hear most often is a former DOJ official named Matthew Colangelo coordinated with Bragg while he was at DOJ and then eventually was hired in December of 2022 by Bragg to help in the case. There Is no question that Colangelo knew a lot about Trump but hiring the guy wasn’t necessary to get it. The hiring was public knowledge and he and Bragg had worked together in the department earlier in their careers.
The MAGA masses are going to believe what they are told by Trump and those supporting him. It’s unfortunate because it insures they will make bad choices relating to selecting those who will affect their lives. One of the most important issues they are being convinced to incorrectly believe is that our justice system can be rigged. I’ll readily support the notion that the system could be improved but that relates to the ability of wealth and fame to alter the outcome in favor of the wealthy and famous. Trump had the best attorneys money could buy and they had every legal maneuver they could imagine available to counter the massive amounts of evidence used to bring this man to trial. What they did not have was the truth. The truth was in the documents and voices of those presented to the jury. The jury recognized it and Trump was convicted. The very first former president to be a convicted felon.
Listed below are the steps that almost always have to be taken to bring a criminal case to trial and to an ultimate conclusion. Dozens if not hundreds of professionals from multiple organization have a part in getting it done.
It starts when evidence of a crime is found or reported.
Three separate governmental agencies will likely act upon the evidence uncovered to determine what should be done if a crime was in fact committed. The appropriate level of government Law enforcement, the government agencies attorney’s general office and the appropriate government judicial system will be called upon to determine what ultimately should be done.
An investigation to uncover the facts of the case is undertaken by both the legal and law enforcement agencies. The judicial system may get involved when their approval is necessary for searches or seizers.
Facts are presented to a grand jury. A group of around 23 individuals selected randomly and called from voter rolls.
A majority of the grand jury, upon hearing the evidence, must vote, in secret, to indict.
A warrant is issued and the subjects of the indictment is arrested.
The charged individual is arranged before a judge and given an opportunity to get facts of the case and enter a plea.
A preliminary hearing will be held where the prosecution shows enough evidence to justify the arrest.
The defense and prosecution gathers and exchanges information about the case’s related events.
Pre-trial motions are filed by both sides that may require a hearing before a judge to decided how, when and under what conditions the case will be tried.
The prosecutor and defense attorney select a jury from a list of registered voters.
Both sides present opening statements to describe their positions regarding the case.
The prosecution presents witnesses and documentation to support their case for conviction. The defense questions those witnesses and challenges documentation when that effort supports their side of the case.
The Defense presents witnesses and documentation to support their case for acquittal. The prosecution questions witnesses and challenges documentation when that effort supports their side of the case.
Boths sides present closing arguments highlighting reasons to convict or acquit the defendant.
The judge presents instructions to the jury on the law and how it should be applied in this case.
The jury reviews the case documentation and testimony in an effort to reach a decision on guilt or innocence. All members must agree in order for a verdict to be rendered. Any jury member can cause a trial to end without reaching a verdict.
A not guilty verdict will result in the defendant being released and charges being withdrawn, or in some cases, reentered.
A guilty verdict causes the defendant to be sentenced to punishment according to the law and the decision of the judge depending on the findings in the case.
Following a guilty verdict the defendant mIght choose to file post-trial motions to overturn or change the jury or judge’s decision.
Following a guilty verdict the defendant might choose to file an appeal with a higher court.
So it’s not over. There is still a chance that Brag’s and his department’s efforts could end in failure. While that may seem unlikely, it is clear evidence that the process followed the expected path toward a fair and equitable solution.
