My absurd experiences in North America over the years

Inside the courtroom, the two sides clashed fiercely.

At the same time, on Manhattan's Upper East Side, there were people who were even more nervous than those directly involved.

Old Kushner stood by the window of his study, a cigarette dangling from his lips, looking out at the gray sky.

The snow has stopped, but the clouds are still hanging low; it seems like half of New York's winter is shrouded in clouds.

Kushner pushed open the door and entered, his footsteps very soft.

"Dad, what do you think of the final outcome of today's court hearing?" He was a little uneasy.

"I think we should be able to get the results we want," Kushner always had an inexplicable confidence.

"But that evidence doesn't prove that Li Fu was involved in drug trafficking at all. Legally speaking, Ivanka's responsibility may be greater than his," Kushner clearly didn't think so.

It is virtually impossible to criminally convict Li Fu.

Old Kushner didn't turn around. "You think I don't know?"

He had been following the public trial closely, and he noticed that the prosecutor Parker's opening statement used a series of strong terms such as "significant threat to public safety" and "organized crime," all of which were deliberately arranged.

To put it bluntly, it's just bluffing.

However, the likelihood of a criminal conviction does not mean that Li Fu cannot be "convicted".

"I never expected the court to sentence him from the beginning," Kushner Sr. turned to his son. "What I wanted was public opinion. As long as his name is associated with drugs, the media will keep chasing him, and the government might waver."

If the government doesn't support them enough, and the gangs cause trouble at the construction site a few more times, the resumption of work will be delayed again and again.

That's the real purpose.

Kushner is far less despicable than his father. "What if he's acquitted?"

"Isn't there also a civil lawsuit?" Old Kushner said confidently. "As long as the jury finds Li Fu at fault, he will have a stain on his record in civil proceedings."

The jury system in the United States is quite unique in the world, and it is completely different from the domestic understanding of "conclusive evidence".

In short, the core difference can be summarized in one sentence: the standard of proof in criminal cases is irrefutable evidence, which must be 100% credible; while the threshold for civil cases is much lower, requiring only that the evidence "sounds more plausible".

Criminal prosecutions are initiated by the government and are intended to punish crimes.

The famous "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard stems from the protection of civil rights, and its basic principle is "it is better to let a bad person go free than to wrongly kill an innocent person."

From this perspective, it is unlikely that Li Fu and Ivanka will be found guilty, no matter how the prosecutors and the court push for it, unless they want to cause a public uproar or create jury bias.

However, civil damages are initiated by individuals and are intended to resolve disputes.

The standard of proof is "preponderance of evidence," which means that whoever's evidence is considered more reasonable, more credible, and has a greater than 50% probability by the jury will win the case.

This subjective judgment gives the jury a great deal of room for maneuver.

Take Carroll's 2024 rape case against Trump as an example. There was no evidence to prove Trump's guilt, and Carroll did not even submit any valid evidence; she simply told a "story."

She doesn't remember the exact time the "story" took place, and her witnesses also swore that Carol had cried to them, but they didn't remember the exact time either.

Such an outrageous statement is obvious to almost everyone; it is actually a political persecution deeply intertwined with the presidential election.

However, the jury still awarded Trump more than $90 million in civil damages, forcing him to declare bankruptcy and delay payment.

This is the “powerful and unreasonable” jury system.

The mastermind behind the Simpson case can also be attributed to the jury's "bias."

In this case, many people believe that there are many Black women on the jury, and that Black women are disgusted by the idea of ​​Black men marrying white women after crossing class lines, so they would not be biased towards Simpson.

This is actually a cognitive error.

Black women were naturally very unhappy that Simpson married a white woman in an attempt to integrate into high society, but they also hated white gold diggers.

Because gold diggers typically target Black athletes, it's a common phenomenon in the United States for athletes to go bankrupt and fall into financial ruin after encountering them.

After the divorce, the woman who allegedly "cashed in" received a huge sum of money and then continued to demand alimony. The alimony was calculated based on her highest income, which might be acceptable during her peak years, but once she declined or retired, the consequences would be dire.

This leads to a situation where even top athletes who encounter gold diggers are unable to support themselves after retirement, ultimately going bankrupt and becoming homeless.

As one of the top football players at the time, Simpson's income was just beginning to decline when he got divorced. Many people knew that if Simpson hadn't killed his wife, there was a good chance that she would have taken advantage of him afterward.

The Black women on the jury certainly hated Simpson for abandoning his wife to marry a blonde white girl, but is it possible that they hated those white "gold diggers" even more?

In essence, the American public at that time understood Simpson's motives. They never doubted that Simpson was the murderer, and there was even a lot of evidence pointing to Simpson. However, the jury ultimately unanimously ruled that Simpson was not criminally guilty.

Many people in China believe that the police's illegal procedures in collecting evidence constitute "procedural justice," which is a huge misconception.

Even if the evidence obtained through illegal means were removed, it would still be sufficient to convict Simpson.

To take it to an extreme, even if the evidence is irrefutable and the police have not violated any rules, the jury can still find him not guilty, and the judge cannot overturn the verdict.

This is the famous jury veto power.

Ultimately, Simpson was acquitted simply because the jury found him "excusable" and garnered their sympathy; nothing more.

The police's actions backfired, giving the jury ample reason to question the verdict.

The verdict is related to procedural justice, but not extensively.

This is the power of the jury system: a guilty verdict can be delivered, and in special circumstances, a guilty verdict can be delivered, although this may cause public outcry and lead to jury bias.

Returning to Li Fu's case, there wasn't enough criminal evidence to convict him; the jury has that much power.

However, doing so would cause a public outcry, and the consequences would be unpredictable.

However, it is much easier to manipulate civil litigation. As long as there is a logical reason, such as Li Fu did affect the surrounding residents, he may be required to pay compensation.

However, once compensation is paid, the party will be at a disadvantage in public opinion, while the media will have an advantage in publicity.

This is why Kushner believed that the desired result could be achieved today; he had already bribed the jury, and a majority vote would suffice.

"Will Ivanka be affected?" Kushner suddenly asked.

Old Kushner frowned immediately, looking rather disappointed. "You're still thinking about that woman?"

Kushner didn't know how to answer for a moment, and after a while he said, "I just feel that we shouldn't have such a bad relationship with the Trump family. We may still need to cooperate in the future."

"Don't worry! No one will know we were involved," old Kushner said, looking out the window again.

He didn't want his son to act on emotion. Whether Kushner's answer was sincere or not, considering this aspect shows that he has a long-term perspective.

The prosecution has finished presenting evidence in court.

Morrison stood up, straightened the hem of his suit jacket, took a document from his briefcase, and handed it to the judge.

"Your Honor, the defense has submitted a surveillance video as evidence, taken at 2:17 a.m. on December 3rd, in the basement equipment room of the construction site where the incident occurred. The video was only recovered from the security company yesterday afternoon. It was not a delay in submission by the defense, but rather a technical difficulty in retrieval."

Prosecutor Parker immediately stood up to object, saying, "The defense submitted the video after the evidence disclosure deadline, and it should not be used as valid evidence."

"Your Honor," Morrison immediately countered, "the defense submitted the video before the deadline, but encountered difficulties accessing it, which caused a delay. The video content was not fabricated by the defense; it is an objective record that captured the actual drug smuggler."

The judge looked at Parker, then at Morrison. "The video submitted by the defense is accepted as evidence by this court. If the prosecution has any objections, they may raise them during the examination of evidence."

Parker could only sit down, his expression not very good.

At this moment, the video began playing on the courtroom's large screen.

The scene was a little dark, but you could see a figure crouching on the equipment floor, taking out black plastic bags from a backpack and stuffing them one by one into the gaps between the steel bars.

The camera angle was excellent, the face was clear, and the act of hiding the drugs was crystal clear.

The audience immediately erupted in discussion.

Parker stood up and questioned, "Attorney Morrison, when was this video recovered?"

"Yesterday afternoon at four o'clock."

Why did it take so long to recover?

"Because the memory card had difficulty being read, we consulted a data expert, and it took several days to restore normal card reading."

"So, you've been working on this video from December 3rd until yesterday?"

"Yes."

"Is it possible that you modified the video during the processing?" Parker seized on the main question and pressed his advantage.

"Madam Prosecutor, the metadata and hash value of the video have been submitted to the court for technical analysis. If you have any objections, you can apply for analysis, but until then, the video should be accepted as evidence."

Parker objected, saying, "There's no reason to accept evidence before its authenticity is confirmed."

The judge was caught in a dilemma and prepared to adjourn the court temporarily to await the results of the technical assessment.

“Not at all,” Morrison said, looking at the judge and jury. “We have a witness. My client requests that one witness be called.”

Parker's expression immediately changed. They actually found a witness?

The judge nodded in approval.

A black man wearing a black hoodie was brought in by bailiffs. He looked to be around thirty years old, with a shaved head and prominent tattoos on his neck. One could tell at a glance that he had probably been a street urchin.

"Please state your name," Morrison began.

"Darryl Washington".

Where were you at 2:17 AM on December 3rd?

"In the basement of a construction site in Queens."

"What are you doing there?"

"Hiding things."

"What are you hiding?"

"...cocaine."

The audience and jury erupted in uproar.

It took the judge two strikes of the gavel to barely restore order.

"Who told you to go?" Morrison pressed.

"A leader of the Sin Lords, codenamed 'Fang'."

"What is the purpose?"

"They framed the construction site owner to stop construction."

"Did you all hear that?" Morrison looked at the jury. "This is the truth. Someone tried to frame my client. The despicable things these people did were outrageous."

"A single piece of evidence is not enough. Do you think you can just find anyone to be a witness?" Parker questioned Washington's identity.

"Madam Prosecutor, I think you've seen the video from earlier. A quick comparison will tell you they're the same person," Morrison said calmly, knowing he had the victory in his grasp.

"You can say that after the video analysis results are out," Parker said stubbornly at this point.

She wasn't trying to disprove it, of course; she just wanted to maintain a certain level of composure.

The video verification process was not complicated; the memory card was only difficult to read at the time, and the video recordings inside were not damaged in any way.

The video recording, which was sent for authentication before the court hearing, quickly yielded results. The authentication confirmed that the video was indeed a genuine recording taken from the basement equipment room.

After comparing the video footage, the person found to be hiding the drugs was none other than Washington, the witness at that moment.

The situation took a dramatic turn, leaving Parker speechless.

However, the jury was deadlocked at this point. It would be very difficult to convict Li Fu criminally, but some jurors insisted that the resumption of construction at the site had infringed on the interests of nearby citizens and that he should still make compensation.

A guilty verdict requires a unanimous jury vote; this is an ironclad rule of the courts.

After lengthy discussions, the jury members were still unable to reach a consensus, even though the evidence submitted by Li Fu was very complete and the person involved in the drug possession confessed in court.

However, despite the fact that five of the twelve jurors could prove Li Fu was innocent, they still insisted that he was guilty.

Four of the other seven people believed that Li Fu should make compensation because the construction site had a substantial impact on nearby residents and homeless people.

Only three people believed that Li Fu was innocent.

It's impossible for a criminal conviction to pass unanimously, so whether civil compensation is required depends on a 5/6 majority vote, meaning that 10 out of 12 people believe Li Fu should pay compensation, which is still one person short.

After repeated deliberations, the jury members were still unable to reach a consensus, so the judge had no choice but to declare the trial invalid, meaning the case was legally closed and everything had to start all over again.

Li Fu was stunned when he heard the judge pronounce the verdict.

He thought he knew enough about the American legal system, but in fact he had seen far too few extreme cases.

The power of the jury is, to some extent, unlimited.

Even if the evidence he submits today is complete, as long as the jury finds him guilty, he can still be convicted, and the judge cannot overturn the jury's decision, but can only impose an appropriate sentence.

This is what makes the jury system so terrible.

American TV shows and inspirational articles that prioritize procedural justice are promoting a very positive image.

If Li Fu is found guilty, he can only appeal, which will most likely be rejected, but time waits for no one.

Alternatively, one could wait for a pardon from the governor or the president. Governors have the power to pardon crimes committed in their state, while the president can grant unlimited pardons for federal crimes.

When Li Fu walked out of the courthouse, he still felt it was unreal. When he learned that Thompson had caught the drug smuggler, he thought he had won a great victory and that he would pull off a stunning comeback during the trial.

Reality undoubtedly disappointed him.

"Don't be discouraged, at least they didn't succeed," Ivanka tried to comfort him.

She didn't seem surprised by the jury's verdict; this case wasn't going to end so easily.

"You should have been prepared, right?" Li Fu looked at Ivanka. The delay in the project would have a greater impact on the Trump Organization than on him.

He didn't believe Trump was unprepared.

He has done what he should and could do, proving that the drug possession case has nothing to do with him or the Trump Organization.

"Leave the rest to us," Ivanka reassured Li Fu. There was a reason why she had remained so calm.