https://constitution.congress.gov/brows ... _00000962/Slimshandy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 2:54 pmIt doesn’t really matter, if the bond is so high that a person can’t get a bond company to secure it, then the 8th amendment of the constitution has been violated if it’s not lowered.jessilin0113 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 2:32 pm Didn't he say on Truth Social that he had $500 mil in cash? Man can't tell the truth or admit defeat to save his life. Malignant narcissism is fascinating to watch in real time.
Eighth Amendment
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted
Which could have gotten the whole case thrown out on appeal- and that would have been after The AG seized his properties- to which he could then sue and win possibly billions from the state of NY.
Much easier to lower the bond…
DT tells court he cannot post bond
Forum rules
Keep News and Politics about News and Politics.
Do not post full articles from other websites. Always link back to the source
Discuss things respectfully and take into account that each person has a different opinion.
Remember that this is a place for everyone to enjoy. Don’t try and run people off of the site. If you are upset with someone then utilize the foe feature.
Report when things come up.
Personal attacks are against guidelines however attacks need to be directed at a member on the forum for it to be against guidelines. Lying is not against guidelines, it’s hard for us to prove someone even did lie.
Once a topic is locked we consider the issue handled and no longer respond to new reports on the topic.
Keep News and Politics about News and Politics.
Do not post full articles from other websites. Always link back to the source
Discuss things respectfully and take into account that each person has a different opinion.
Remember that this is a place for everyone to enjoy. Don’t try and run people off of the site. If you are upset with someone then utilize the foe feature.
Report when things come up.
Personal attacks are against guidelines however attacks need to be directed at a member on the forum for it to be against guidelines. Lying is not against guidelines, it’s hard for us to prove someone even did lie.
Once a topic is locked we consider the issue handled and no longer respond to new reports on the topic.
-
- Princess
- Posts: 22546
- Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 12:46 pm
306/232
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
-
- Princess
- Posts: 22546
- Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 12:46 pm
I think she's misunderstanding a bail bond with an appeal bond.MonarchMom wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 3:02 pmIsn't that in effect before you stand trial? So as not to imprison someone who is innocent until proven guilty? In this case the trial has already happened, and judgement already made.Slimshandy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 2:54 pmIt doesn’t really matter, if the bond is so high that a person can’t get a bond company to secure it, then the 8th amendment of the constitution has been violated if it’s not lowered.jessilin0113 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 2:32 pm Didn't he say on Truth Social that he had $500 mil in cash? Man can't tell the truth or admit defeat to save his life. Malignant narcissism is fascinating to watch in real time.
Eighth Amendment
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted
Which could have gotten the whole case thrown out on appeal- and that would have been after The AG seized his properties- to which he could then sue and win possibly billions from the state of NY.
Much easier to lower the bond…
306/232
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
-
- Duchess
- Posts: 1647
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2023 8:30 am
It would apply to any fines or fees that the government gets part of, which it would here.MonarchMom wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 3:02 pmIsn't that in effect before you stand trial? So as not to imprison someone who is innocent until proven guilty? In this case the trial has already happened, and judgement already made.Slimshandy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 2:54 pmIt doesn’t really matter, if the bond is so high that a person can’t get a bond company to secure it, then the 8th amendment of the constitution has been violated if it’s not lowered.jessilin0113 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 2:32 pm Didn't he say on Truth Social that he had $500 mil in cash? Man can't tell the truth or admit defeat to save his life. Malignant narcissism is fascinating to watch in real time.
Eighth Amendment
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted
Which could have gotten the whole case thrown out on appeal- and that would have been after The AG seized his properties- to which he could then sue and win possibly billions from the state of NY.
Much easier to lower the bond…
-
- Duchess
- Posts: 1647
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2023 8:30 am
Yeah… read it.Della wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 3:15 pmhttps://constitution.congress.gov/brows ... _00000962/Slimshandy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 2:54 pmIt doesn’t really matter, if the bond is so high that a person can’t get a bond company to secure it, then the 8th amendment of the constitution has been violated if it’s not lowered.jessilin0113 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 2:32 pm Didn't he say on Truth Social that he had $500 mil in cash? Man can't tell the truth or admit defeat to save his life. Malignant narcissism is fascinating to watch in real time.
Eighth Amendment
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted
Which could have gotten the whole case thrown out on appeal- and that would have been after The AG seized his properties- to which he could then sue and win possibly billions from the state of NY.
Much easier to lower the bond…
-
- Princess
- Posts: 22546
- Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 12:46 pm
You think I don't read things to know what they're about before I post them?Slimshandy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 4:15 pmYeah… read it.Della wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 3:15 pmhttps://constitution.congress.gov/brows ... _00000962/Slimshandy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 2:54 pm
It doesn’t really matter, if the bond is so high that a person can’t get a bond company to secure it, then the 8th amendment of the constitution has been violated if it’s not lowered.
Eighth Amendment
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted
Which could have gotten the whole case thrown out on appeal- and that would have been after The AG seized his properties- to which he could then sue and win possibly billions from the state of NY.
Much easier to lower the bond…
306/232
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
-
- Duchess
- Posts: 1647
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2023 8:30 am
Oh, so you were just providing backup information to what I said.Della wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 4:46 pmYou think I don't read things to know what they're about before I post them?
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
- Quorra2.0
- Regent
- Posts: 4876
- Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2018 10:39 am
His bond, they didn’t lower the amount he owes.Slimshandy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 2:04 pmWeird.Quorra2.0 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 7:02 pmIt would be weird since they can’t do that. Lowering the amount would be something that can be asked on appeal. However, he has to pay the appeal bond, which is the judgement plus interest, to appeal. For example, judgement over Jean Carroll was a little over 83 mil, he’s appealing and the appeal bond he paid was a little over 91 mil(judgement plus interest).Slimshandy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 6:05 pm Wouldn’t it be weird if the judge lowered the amount he owed because of this…
They lowered his bond.
-
- Princess
- Posts: 22546
- Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 12:46 pm
In layman's terms, explain what it means?Slimshandy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 5:45 pmOh, so you were just providing backup information to what I said.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
306/232
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
-
- Duchess
- Posts: 1647
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2023 8:30 am
The Court has held the clause inapplicable to civil jury awards of punitive damages in cases between private parties, when the government neither has prosecuted the action nor has any right to receive a share of the damages awarded.4 The Court based this conclusion on a review of the history and purposes of the Excessive Fines Clause. At the time the Eighth Amendment was adopted, the Court noted, the word ‘fine’ was understood to mean a payment to a sovereign as punishment for some offense.Della wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 5:55 pmIn layman's terms, explain what it means?Slimshandy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 5:45 pmOh, so you were just providing backup information to what I said.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
It means that normally in civil trials this doesn’t apply, but in cases where the state/fed would be monetary recipients, it does.
-
- Princess
- Posts: 22546
- Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 12:46 pm
What about the bolded?Slimshandy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 7:33 pmThe Court has held the clause inapplicable to civil jury awards of punitive damages in cases between private parties, when the government neither has prosecuted the action nor has any right to receive a share of the damages awarded.4 The Court based this conclusion on a review of the history and purposes of the Excessive Fines Clause. At the time the Eighth Amendment was adopted, the Court noted, the word ‘fine’ was understood to mean a payment to a sovereign as punishment for some offense.Della wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 5:55 pmIn layman's terms, explain what it means?Slimshandy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 5:45 pm
Oh, so you were just providing backup information to what I said.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
It means that normally in civil trials this doesn’t apply, but in cases where the state/fed would be monetary recipients, it does.
306/232
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!