Does NY have another corrupt judge?

[CKwi88]

(05-30-2024, 04:46 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: This is where I read the article. https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-trial-jury-rain-metaphor-instructions-evidence-2024-5







But what an ass I make of myself if I wake up and tell everyone it rained, and then find out the fire department cleared the hydrants, or the street sweeper went by, or the neighbors lawn sprinkler bled into my yard. Weak examples for sure, but they are real. If you can't prove it, then he's innocent. 

The spirit of the instruction is to explain that the jury can make reasonable, logical and natural inferences from the totality of the circumstances. The instruction is not meant to provide an exhaustive example that would exclude every other imaginable reason that the sidewalk is wet, but to illustrate what reasonable, logical and natural inferences can be made after seeing the evidence that the street and sidewalks are wet. 

If given the circumstances there is a reasonable belief that the wetness was caused by a hydrant, sprinkler or street sweeper (like completely dry rooftops or trees) then this creates a reasonable doubt regarding the rain. The applicability of that concept would be explained to the jury in the judge's instruction regarding burden of proof.