Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MichMary

(1,714 posts)
Thu May 18, 2017, 11:12 AM May 2017

Question about evidence re: Comey memo

Just wondering if a prosecution for obstruction can be based solely on Comey's memo. what if Trump disputes what was said? Then it's a matter of he-said/he-said. I would like to think that the memo makes the case a slam dunk, but don't know how much weight this would actually carry.

15 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Question about evidence re: Comey memo (Original Post) MichMary May 2017 OP
Solely? No.... Wounded Bear May 2017 #1
This! MichMary May 2017 #7
Not on that alone, but it would be evidence to be considered. MineralMan May 2017 #2
It's not verifiable evidence as I understand it. n/t TexasProgresive May 2017 #3
Huh? djg21 May 2017 #15
You might find this thread worth your while jberryhill May 2017 #4
Interesting MichMary May 2017 #6
You are confusing 'evidence' with 'proof' jberryhill May 2017 #8
The body was never found . . . MichMary May 2017 #10
Do you own any fish gutting knives? jberryhill May 2017 #11
Again, very interesting MichMary May 2017 #13
I believe notes written by the FBI are taken more seriously than someones recollection. womanofthehills May 2017 #14
It's a little like a cop's notes in court Jarqui May 2017 #5
Sending witnesses out of the room. That's the clincher IMO. nt justiceischeap May 2017 #9
Maybe he'll claim he did that to ask Comey if he could see his dick. Jarqui May 2017 #12

Wounded Bear

(58,207 posts)
1. Solely? No....
Thu May 18, 2017, 11:14 AM
May 2017

they would be part of a chain of evidence, but it would be a tenuous case if that was the only evidence.

Besides, there is plenty of "evidence" of what Trump did and why in the public domain. Just read his Twitter rants and play back his interviews and speeches.

 

djg21

(1,803 posts)
15. Huh?
Thu May 18, 2017, 12:17 PM
May 2017

It's hearsay, but it comes in as under an exception to the hearsay rule as a business record or present sense impression (or it may be used to refresh Comey's recollection). Before being accepted into evidence, the memo needs to be authenticated, which would require Comey to testify and lay the foundation as to how and why he prepared it.

Is it enough? It certainly presents a question of fact and it would be up to a jury to determine whether or not to believe SCROTUS or Comey and whether it evidenced obstruction. I'd want more proof if I were prosecuting.

MichMary

(1,714 posts)
6. Interesting
Thu May 18, 2017, 11:34 AM
May 2017

If I have a dispute with a neighbor, who later says, "I went straight into my house and wrote down, word for word, what she said to me. She threatened to gut me like a fish!!!" If that is entered into evidence, how can I refute that. "Did not," seems kind of lame.

Isn't this the same sort of thing?

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
8. You are confusing 'evidence' with 'proof'
Thu May 18, 2017, 11:40 AM
May 2017

It's up to a jury to decide what weight or credibility to give it.

Just because something is admissible as evidence, doesn't make it true.

What is this trial about. Did she end up in the trunk of your car gutted like a fish?
 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
11. Do you own any fish gutting knives?
Thu May 18, 2017, 11:55 AM
May 2017

Are any of them missing?

But the point is that any piece of "evidence" that is admitted, goes into the larger factual landscape. A piece of evidence tends to support one proposition or another, by making it more, or less likely. But a piece of evidence doesn't prove what happened - it needs to go into the wagon load of other evidence to be sorted out by a jury.

MichMary

(1,714 posts)
13. Again, very interesting
Thu May 18, 2017, 12:07 PM
May 2017

I just finished reading Cardiac Arrest by Howard Root, CEO of Vascular Solutions, Inc. about his, and his company's, trial. Granted, it was just his side of things, but it was a great behind-the-scenes look at what happens in a trial. The prosecution had a very flimsy case, and tt sounds like the expectation was that the company would roll over and take whatever settlement the prosecution was willing to offer. Instead, Root and VSI took it to trial and won, at a cost of $25,000,000.

In the Comey/Trump matter, I sure hope there is a lot of evidence.

Jarqui

(10,060 posts)
5. It's a little like a cop's notes in court
Thu May 18, 2017, 11:25 AM
May 2017

Combined with Comey's reputation, it's significant evidence. Enough to convict on it's own? Doubt it. But when it's a part of the string of events (firing Yates, firing US attorneys - some who were investigating Trump, etc), it helps push it towards beyond reasonable doubt.

Jarqui

(10,060 posts)
12. Maybe he'll claim he did that to ask Comey if he could see his dick.
Thu May 18, 2017, 12:04 PM
May 2017

It's certainly another fact that looks bad. But their best chance has to include the whole set of facts for it to have a good chance. The criminal bar of beyond reasonable doubt is much higher than the civil bar as OJ Simpson can tell you.

Now if Mensch's story of Trump people accessing Comey's computer while they fired him and giving the USB stick of Comey's data to the Russian diplomats (since recovered by the FBI) is true, I don't think the memo is going to be required. They can just haggle the prison sentence.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Question about evidence r...