During an interview with Newsmax TV on Wednesday, New York Times bestselling Breaking Biden author and Breitbart News Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow stated that the allegations being put to the jury in 2024 Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump's trial are ridiculously vague and the judge is "suggesting that you don't even have to agree on what the crime is."
The post Marlow: Vagueness in Trump Case ‘Clearly Unconstitutional’ appeared first on Breitbart.
During an interview with Newsmax TV on Wednesday, New York Times bestselling Breaking Biden author and Breitbart News Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow stated that the allegations being put to the jury in 2024 Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump’s trial are ridiculously vague and the judge is “suggesting that you don’t even have to agree on what the crime is. He’s acting as though twelve people can all decide that if Trump is guilty of something, a combination of things, then he’s guilty.”
Marlow said, “I think the key point to make is we still don’t know what all the charges are, and we’re deliberating now. So, we don’t know what all the laws that were violated and this vagueness is clearly unconstitutional. … But he’s suggesting that you don’t even have to agree on what the crime is. He’s acting as though twelve people can all decide that if Trump is guilty of something, a combination of things, then he’s guilty.”
Later in the segment, Marlow said that due to the vagueness of the instructions and an attempt by the prosecution to create a bizarre “constellation of different crimes,” “the confusion must be off the charts” for the jury.
Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett
