- Joined
- Jan 21, 2013
- Messages
- 25,357
- Reaction score
- 11,557
- Location
- Post-Trump America
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
I do not think tweets have that much impact in criminal cases, but this is case is shall we say, special...
Are you kidding? The very fact that Donald Trump has ever existed is probably witness tampering. You guys are going to have to find a way to completely erase him from history before your world will ever be same again.
The Trump Administration declared its Tweets to be official communication almost 2 years ago. As stupid and shortsighted as the communication policy is it characterizes the impulsive, slap dash, half-assed, arrogance and ironic cluelessness of the Trump Administration. If Tweets have been and are a problem for the Administration it is the President’s own doing and will ultimately contribute to his undoing.
Are you kidding? The very fact that Donald Trump has ever existed is probably witness tampering. You guys are going to have to find a way to completely erase him from history before your world will ever be same again.
Are you kidding? The very fact that Donald Trump has ever existed is probably witness tampering. You guys are going to have to find a way to completely erase him from history before your world will ever be same again.
Are Tweets Witness Tampering?
are you kidding? The very fact that donald trump has ever existed is probably witness tampering. You guys are going to have to find a way to completely erase him from history before your world will ever be same again.
"Can they be_______" is the question, and I suspect the answer is "most definitely they can but it really depends".
That is my view as well, but I mean. If you are part of a case that has all evidence against you, and you know more about it than the President. Is a tweet really going to affect your decision of what you say??? So far...None have remained loyal to Trump while under oath. I even suspect Trump and Giuliani won't. Regardless of any tweets. Now I suspect Mueller is letting Flynn out to see what Trump will do.
Hell, I dunno without starting to comb through federal cases (really). Some of Trump's tweets struck me as quite troubling but if I've learned anything it's that one should never assume what the law is on a given question.
I do not think tweets have that much impact in criminal cases, but this is case is shall we say, special...
Are there examples of this in current cases??? Mob bosses generally don't use twitter, unless you count Kingpin's social media accounts..
Has anybody ever been convicted of witness tampering in which the alleged “tampering” was done publicly, like on TV or radio or such?
Mob bosses, racketeers, spies, etc. also aren't immune from federal prosecution on account of a DoJ policy, nor have they any plausible reason to expect to be pardoned by their successor. Accordingly, they have better sense than to run their mouths about what is and isn't, and about what they did or didn't do.
Are there examples of this in current cases??? Mob bosses generally don't use twitter, unless you count Kingpin's social media accounts..
~ No. Tweets are merely opinions. In the case of Trump he also "reports" his daily activities.
However I believe they do not help and eventually may even hurt do to 'Trump Hate Fever' . :3oops:
Any form of communication with a government witness, where a witnesses testimony could be influenced, is in fact witness tampering.I believe it depends on the nature, and intended audience, of the tweets.
Twitter is a valid form of communication, and any communication that is threatening or intimidating in nature could be considered witness tampering.
That's the thing. I don't know. I haven't glanced at witness tampering since something in MA 8ish years ago so it wasn't federal witness tampering, and I don't really remember....wasn't my case.
I suspect that the nub of the thing would be the intent of the tweeter. The fact that was a tweet strikes me as very likely to be irrelevant, especially in today's environment when the tweeter in question immediately gets quoted in every last media source in the country. That is, I suspect the main question would be whether Trump intended to influence the target's interactions with the police by praising people who don't talk, cursing "rat", yadda yadda.
But those are probably just good bets. I would further bet that if this was researched in the normal way, you won't get much in the way of an estimate about the likelihood of his being convicted. You could easily find out the bare minimum required to send a case to the jury and you might extrapolate a bit from what you read, but collecting a statistic like the probability of being convicted if charged is something I wouldn't know how to do and would suspect would take quite an expensive effort given how clunky the country's overall court system(s) are. (You'd have to investigate cases resulting in acquittal, which aren't appealed. That means a lot of investigation and digging all around the country).
Do we have any lawyers that have done a meaningful amount of recent-ish federal witness tampering cases involving a communication that goes out to the public and involving a communicator whose statements are particularly likely to be reported, especially as that discuss these facts in relation to intent?
That's the thing. I don't know. I haven't glanced at witness tampering since something in MA 8ish years ago so it wasn't federal witness tampering, and I don't really remember....wasn't my case.
I suspect that the nub of the thing would be the intent of the tweeter. The fact that was a tweet strikes me as very likely to be irrelevant, especially in today's environment when the tweeter in question immediately gets quoted in every last media source in the country. That is, I suspect the main question would be whether Trump intended to influence the target's interactions with the police by praising people who don't talk, cursing "rat", yadda yadda.
But those are probably just good bets. I would further bet that if this was researched in the normal way, you won't get much in the way of an estimate about the likelihood of his being convicted. You could easily find out the bare minimum required to send a case to the jury and you might extrapolate a bit from what you read, but collecting a statistic like the probability of being convicted if charged is something I wouldn't know how to do and would suspect would take quite an expensive effort given how clunky the country's overall court system(s) are. (You'd have to investigate cases resulting in acquittal, which aren't appealed. That means a lot of investigation and digging all around the country).
Do we have any lawyers that have done a meaningful amount of recent-ish federal witness tampering cases involving a communication that goes out to the public and involving a communicator whose statements are particularly likely to be reported, especially as that discuss these facts in relation to intent?
~ No. Tweets are merely opinions. In the case of Trump he also "reports" his daily activities.
However I believe they do not help and eventually may even hurt do to 'Trump Hate Fever' . :3oops:
I do not think tweets have that much impact in criminal cases, but this is case is shall we say, special...