• oxjox@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    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.

    • chetradley@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      4 months ago

      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.