Do you know the difference between a charge and a conviction?

[msc545]

The terms charge and conviction refer to different stages in the criminal justice process:

Charge:

A charge is a formal accusation made by law enforcement or a prosecutor that a person has committed a specific crime.
It initiates the legal process but does not imply guilt.
A person who is charged is referred to as the defendant and will face court proceedings where evidence is presented.
Charges can be dismissed, amended, or dropped before trial.
Example: Being charged with theft means you are accused of stealing, but it has not been proven.

Conviction:

A conviction occurs when a court determines that the defendant is guilty of the crime they were charged with, either through a trial or a guilty plea.
A conviction typically results in sentencing, which may involve penalties like fines, probation, or imprisonment.
Conversely, if the defendant is found not guilty, there is no conviction.
Example: If the evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that you committed theft, you are convicted of the crime.

In summary:

A charge is an accusation.
A conviction is the outcome of a legal process where guilt has been proven.

[Anonymous]

If your a well known conservative in D. C. or NYC 80-90% democrat jurisdictions the law is a suggestion and trial is a formality.

Don't do business and avoid those areas for your own short term and long term safety

[msc545]

As usual, you have an opinion and no proof.

[Opinion Owner]

@msc545
This case itself might be shown as proof that this is the case. Nobody before had been soo treated.

But your right this can only be my opinion of new York and its alleged legal system as it was stated to be.

[msc545]

Just because somebody creates a unique or unusual crime does not mean it isn't still a crime. Just because that crime happens to present a unique situation for the legal system doesn't mean it doesn't belong in the legal system.

[Opinion Owner]

@msc545
One would suspect you never heard of the concept of equal application or justice under the law. @msc545

If a "Crime" or in this case "interpretation" of a crime is soo rare as to apply only conveniently to your political enemies you are not upholding laws but persecuting said enemies.

When you create a "crime" to which you only apply selectively to your enemies you are abusing your power not upholding laws. not enforcing law but

[msc545]

There was selective application of the law. The only thing that happened is that you simply did not like the person that was applied to. It was appropriately applied and the penalties were minimal. As a practical matter, there never will be any penalties applied because the system allowed him to get away with no penalties at all. That has to be a good outcome in your eyes.

[msc545]

No selective application of the law

[Opinion Owner]

@msc545 I must admit I have mixed feelings about the outcome as a non-New Yorker I see the legal caios and untrustworthiness of the New York 'legal' system as advantageous to my more trustworthy state and the economy that support me and my family.

As an American the fact that this can be done at all now being a factor in politics is sad undermining of the idea of justice even if it may ultimately be a necessary one. Also sad that it is a disaster for the state and people of New York in which I know people.

A far better outcome for them would be for the case to be thrown out by a higher New York court thus proving the New York court would not allow this sort of abuse to others.

Honestly what happened to Donald Trump was inconsequential to me in the grand scheme of things. If Trump lives to the end of his presidency he won't too much longer so this really doesn't matter to him as an indiviual.
The real problem is every other new Yorker and former New Yorker who is now exposed to the same open ended legal jeperty. This will continue to drive a lot of money and people out of the state.

[msc545]

Yes. Good points even if I am not in complete agreement.

[DrPepper12]

You don't know jack shit about NYC legal system

[DrPepper12]

Yeah, now if only the MAGAs understood the reasons and process behind bail which they have NO clue why it exists and presume that because the state charged them or indicted them that it means that they're guilty and should be held until trial.*

*Except if you're white & wealthy.

[CaptainSmartass]

Yeah. A charge is when the police formally accuse you of a crime. A conviction is when a jury returns a guilty verdict of an offence following a trial.

Simples...

[msc545]

Yes you are right about this completely. I just don't know why it is that conservatives seem to have a lot of difficulty figuring this out. They don't seem to be able to put together. The fact that someone who has been convicted of a crime is a convicted criminal and that doesn't get reversed.

[goaded]

Yes, I do. Why do you ask?

[msc545]

So many conservatives seem not to know at all...

[goaded]

Oh, for them it's simple. Every accusation from the right is true, every indictment or conviction against the right is fake.

[msc545]

oh of course. !

[Fireguy17]

yeppers.