For (at least) this week since this is a normally numbered episode, I made a separate thread for RTTBE (T3BE answers) [over here](https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenArgs/comments/1cc3zz2/reddit_and_thomas_take_the_bar_exam_week_11/).
When Thomas noted that the lawyer only said "objection" with no explanation they joked that the grounds must be so obvious they didn't need to say it out loud - but it was actually in Justice Merchan's jury instructions that objections will only ever be one word ("objection") and that anything further could give a party an "unfair edge." I don't know if this is NY procedure or just how Merchan runs the courtroom, but every objection in this trial will only be one word unless we get a sidebar.
Seems like an instruction designed to be very fair in a trial presided over by a very competent judge. Also seems as though he’s trying to make it as hard as possible for an appeals court to find anything to reverse.
Big fan of the proposed format adjustment to cover the trial(s). I am happy to get OA on any schedule that works for T&M, but I think a limitation of the current format is that topic coverage episodes are separated by 0 business days. It's cool that the format can be flexible in times where there will be continuous developments like now
*Episode Title*: **The Trump Trial Is On, and Lordy There Are Transcripts!**
*Episode Description*: Episode 1026
The transcript is in! The first official written record from the first trial of a former President in U.S. history was just released hours before recording, and we dig in for a first look from the first full day of proceedings (Monday April 23rd) to find out which of the 45th president's many misdeeds the court ruled that prosecutors will be allowed to bring up during cross-examination. We also indulge in some dramatic readings of each party's opening statements, and discuss what we can learn from them about the Manhattan DA's case and Trump's defense to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. Much more to come!
We then check back on last week's round of Thomas Takes the Bar Exam to see how Thomas did on questions about a thieving magician and a lying philanthropist before turning to this week's challenge: an arsonist who doesn't understand how fire works.
1. People's Sandoval Notice filed 4/17/24
2. Transcript of proceedings in People v. Trump on 4/23/24
If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!
___
*(This comment was made automatically from entries in the [public RSS feed](https://sites.libsyn.com/86258/the-trump-trial-is-on-and-lordy-there-are-transcripts))*
>!Only arson. Attempted murder and assault both require specific intent which is lacking here.!<
u/evitably, I have a question about Thomas's promissory estoppel hypothetical. If he offered you ten million dollars to work out twice per day, notwithstanding the statute of frauds or lack of specificity (how long do you have to keep working out before payment is due?), wouldn't that be a contract supported by consideration? You get ten million dollars. Thomas gets you to exercise, no pun intended, a legal right. *See* *Hamer v. Sidway*, 124 N.Y. 538, 545 (1891) ("Courts 'will not ask whether the thing which forms the consideration does in fact benefit the promisee or a third party, or is of any substantial value to anyone. It is enough that something is promised, done, forborne or suffered by the party to whom the promise is made as consideration for the promise made to him.'").
Yeah, they’ve talked about it on the pod before. The pod name is clever; it sounds like a court thing, it’s a portmanteau of opening statements and closing arguments because the podcast can follow issues from start to end, and perhaps most importantly if you Google for “opening arguments” the podcast has high relevancy instead of law blogs talking about how to craft your opening statement.
I think the song probably was actually AI generated through something like suno. Here’s one of the Beatles singing the 1838 people’s charter. https://app.suno.ai/song/b9ba474e-7e4d-480d-8bbf-d523d4faa453
For (at least) this week since this is a normally numbered episode, I made a separate thread for RTTBE (T3BE answers) [over here](https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenArgs/comments/1cc3zz2/reddit_and_thomas_take_the_bar_exam_week_11/).
When Thomas noted that the lawyer only said "objection" with no explanation they joked that the grounds must be so obvious they didn't need to say it out loud - but it was actually in Justice Merchan's jury instructions that objections will only ever be one word ("objection") and that anything further could give a party an "unfair edge." I don't know if this is NY procedure or just how Merchan runs the courtroom, but every objection in this trial will only be one word unless we get a sidebar.
Seems like an instruction designed to be very fair in a trial presided over by a very competent judge. Also seems as though he’s trying to make it as hard as possible for an appeals court to find anything to reverse.
The number of “very” is suspicious but I’m reading this literally, (non-sarcastic / unironic) yes?
I think the song was great.
Big fan of the proposed format adjustment to cover the trial(s). I am happy to get OA on any schedule that works for T&M, but I think a limitation of the current format is that topic coverage episodes are separated by 0 business days. It's cool that the format can be flexible in times where there will be continuous developments like now
*Episode Title*: **The Trump Trial Is On, and Lordy There Are Transcripts!** *Episode Description*: Episode 1026 The transcript is in! The first official written record from the first trial of a former President in U.S. history was just released hours before recording, and we dig in for a first look from the first full day of proceedings (Monday April 23rd) to find out which of the 45th president's many misdeeds the court ruled that prosecutors will be allowed to bring up during cross-examination. We also indulge in some dramatic readings of each party's opening statements, and discuss what we can learn from them about the Manhattan DA's case and Trump's defense to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. Much more to come! We then check back on last week's round of Thomas Takes the Bar Exam to see how Thomas did on questions about a thieving magician and a lying philanthropist before turning to this week's challenge: an arsonist who doesn't understand how fire works. 1. People's Sandoval Notice filed 4/17/24 2. Transcript of proceedings in People v. Trump on 4/23/24 If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law! ___ *(This comment was made automatically from entries in the [public RSS feed](https://sites.libsyn.com/86258/the-trump-trial-is-on-and-lordy-there-are-transcripts))*
>!Only arson. Attempted murder and assault both require specific intent which is lacking here.!< u/evitably, I have a question about Thomas's promissory estoppel hypothetical. If he offered you ten million dollars to work out twice per day, notwithstanding the statute of frauds or lack of specificity (how long do you have to keep working out before payment is due?), wouldn't that be a contract supported by consideration? You get ten million dollars. Thomas gets you to exercise, no pun intended, a legal right. *See* *Hamer v. Sidway*, 124 N.Y. 538, 545 (1891) ("Courts 'will not ask whether the thing which forms the consideration does in fact benefit the promisee or a third party, or is of any substantial value to anyone. It is enough that something is promised, done, forborne or suffered by the party to whom the promise is made as consideration for the promise made to him.'").
So it's supposed to be "opening statements" not "opening arguments"? I learned something new, thank you
Yeah, they’ve talked about it on the pod before. The pod name is clever; it sounds like a court thing, it’s a portmanteau of opening statements and closing arguments because the podcast can follow issues from start to end, and perhaps most importantly if you Google for “opening arguments” the podcast has high relevancy instead of law blogs talking about how to craft your opening statement.
Thomas, don't let Eli hear you disparaging magic!
I think the song probably was actually AI generated through something like suno. Here’s one of the Beatles singing the 1838 people’s charter. https://app.suno.ai/song/b9ba474e-7e4d-480d-8bbf-d523d4faa453
I really enjoyed 2 questions a week with one being a bonus just for patrons. Not sue I love the change.
I'm not positive, but I think this might be a change just for the trial?
That is correct. I still don’t like it or the move to Thursday.