Name: CNN 分析員詳述特朗普與緩刑監督官的虛擬會面 (CNN analyst details Trump's virtual meeting with probation officer)
Uploaded: 2024-06-11T04:44:54.000Z
Duration: 5 min 45 s

程度副詞

Also in our law and justice league today, Donald Trump attended his pre-sentencing interview virtually today with a probation officer after that Manhattan jury found him guilty of 34 felony charges last month related to that cover-up of a hush money payment to adult film actress and director Stormy Daniels.

此外，在我們今天的法律和司法聯盟中，唐納德-特朗普（Donald Trump）在曼哈頓陪審團上個月裁定他犯有34項重罪指控，涉及向成人電影女演員兼導演斯托米-丹尼爾斯（Stormy Daniels）支付封口費的掩蓋事實。

CNN記者約翰-米勒（John Miller）現在加入我們的報道。

John, what's the purpose of today's interview?

約翰，今天採訪的目的是什麼？

What did the probation officer likely ask the 45th president?

緩刑監督官可能會問第 45 任總統什麼？

So the purpose of today's interview is for them to prepare a PSR or a pre-sentence report for the judge.

所以今天面談的目的是讓他們為法官准備一份 PSR 或判刑前報告。

This is basically where the probation department, which could in today's meeting have included the commissioner, a couple of senior members, maybe a social worker, but it's where the probation department meets with someone who's going to come for sentencing and they ask questions about family background, financial status, living situation, a lot of basic questions which coming from Donald Trump would have not the usual answers they get from their common defendant.

在今天的會議中，緩刑部門可能包括專員、幾位資深成員，或許還有一位社會工作者，但這基本上是緩刑部門與即將被判刑的人會面的地方，他們會詢問有關家庭背景、經濟狀況、生活狀況等許多基本問題，這些問題來自唐納德-特朗普，而不是他們從普通被告那裡得到的通常答案。

But what they do is they write up their report and they submit it to the judge basically saying, is this person a good candidate for what they call community corrections, which means being supervised on the outside rather than in jail or in prison.

但他們要做的就是寫好報告，然後提交給法官，基本上就是說，這個人是否適合接受所謂的社區矯正，也就是在外面接受監督，而不是在監獄或牢房裡。

Will Trump's interview or was Trump's interview likely different from the average probation client do you think?

您認為特朗普的面試或特朗普的面試是否會與普通緩刑委託人有所不同？

Our understanding is that the interview was scheduled for around 3.30 this afternoon.

據我們瞭解，面談安排在今天下午 3 點半左右。

It can usually take an hour or two, so that interview may still be going on as we speak.

這通常需要一兩個小時，所以在我們說話的時候，面試可能還在進行。

But the average client, they're looking to ask about family history.

但對於普通客戶來說，他們想了解的是家族史。

His family history isn't the average family history, education, criminal background.

他的家世、教育和犯罪背景都不是普通人能比的。

So he doesn't have a criminal background except he will have to explain to them that he has three open felony cases pending in other jurisdictions, two special counsel, one in Georgia, what's his employment history, he's always worked for his dad or himself, substance abuse issues, medical conditions, financial status, I'm a billionaire, where do you live, in a big tower with my name and gold letters on it, in a triplex penthouse.

所以，他沒有犯罪背景，只是他必須向他們解釋，他在其他司法管轄區有三起未結的重罪案件，兩起是特別顧問案件，一起在佐治亞州，他的就業歷史是什麼，他一直在為他父親或他自己工作，藥物濫用問題，醫療條件，財務狀況，我是億萬富翁，你住在哪裡，在一個大大廈裡，上面有我的名字和金色的字母，在一個三層複式閣樓裡。

That said, this is the Manhattan DA's office, it's the New York City Department of Probation.

也就是說，這是曼哈頓檢察官辦公室，是紐約市緩刑局。

This will not be the first white-collar defendant they've brought in who's a millionaire, but it is unusual because it will be the first person they've ever brought in who was a former president of the United States and running to get that job again.

這並不是他們引入的第一位百萬富翁白領被告，但這並不尋常，因為這將是他們引入的第一位曾擔任美國前總統，併為再次獲得這份工作而奔走的人。

He worked for his dad, he worked for himself, and he worked for the American people for four years also, John Miller.

他為父親工作，為自己工作，也為美國人民工作了四年，約翰-米勒。

讓我們請出CNN記者伊萊-霍尼格。

How does this pre-sentencing report weigh into the judge's sentencing decision?

這份判決前報告如何影響法官的判決決定？

So ordinarily, PSR's pre-sentencing reports can be influential.

是以，通常 PSR 的判決前報告是有影響力的。

Judges want to know a bit more about the person, but in this case, what's not known about Donald Trump, and I doubt Judge Mershawn is going to be much persuaded by this, I mean, this is a decision that he and he alone will make and he has to live with.

法官希望對當事人有更多的瞭解，但在這種情況下，唐納德-特朗普（Donald Trump）的情況並不為人所知，我懷疑法官默沙東（Mershawn）會是以被說服，我的意思是，這是他一個人的決定，他必須接受。

He knows that this will be his mark in the historical record books.

他知道，這將是他載入史冊的一筆。

I don't think he's going to give all that much credence to whatever probation recommends.

我認為他不會完全相信緩刑建議。

When it comes to sentencing, what do you think the defense is going to recommend?

在量刑時，你認為辯方會提出什麼建議？

What do you think the prosecution is going to recommend?

So the defense is certainly going to ask for a non-custodial sentence.

所以辯方肯定會要求判處非監禁刑罰。

They're going to ask for some combination of probation or a fine or maybe community service.

他們會要求緩刑、罰款或社區服務。

A healthy majority of people convicted of this exact crime do get non-incarceratory sentences in New York, somewhere between 70 and 90 percent.

在紐約，絕大多數被判犯有此類罪行的人都不會被判處監禁，比例大約在 70% 到 90% 之間。

I also think the prosecution is going to ask for imprisonment, and I think, first of all, because there are aggravating factors here that make this worse in the prosecution's opinion, your typical falsification of records.

我還認為檢方會要求判處監禁，我認為，首先，因為在檢方看來，這裡有加重處罰的因素，使情況變得更糟，這就是典型的偽造記錄。

Breaking the gag order, his open contempt for the judge in the process, the fact that the conduct impacted an election.

他違反了禁言令，在此過程中公然蔑視法官，其行為影響了選舉。

I also think it's hard for the DA, as just a practical and political matter, to bring this case, get the convictions, and then say, we're fine with probation.

我還認為，作為一個實際和政治問題，地方檢察官很難在提起此案、定罪後說，我們對緩刑沒有意見。

So I expect guessing, but I expect Alvin Bragg to ask for some sort of prison sentence.

所以我猜測阿爾文-布拉格會要求判處某種監禁。

You know, it's possible that we didn't discuss this enough because the amount was so minuscule, $35 for 15 designated to the Trump campaign, against the Trump campaign, for the Biden campaign.

你知道，我們可能沒有充分討論這個問題，因為金額實在太微不足道了，特朗普競選團隊、反對特朗普競選團隊、拜登競選團隊指定的15美元中只有35美元。

But it is inherently unusual and very frowned upon for a judge to have given political donations and then not to have recused himself.

但是，法官接受政治獻金後又不迴避，這本身就不尋常，也非常令人不齒。

Again, the amount was small, but still, is that not grounds for an appeal in and of itself?

同樣，雖然數額不大，但這本身就不能成為上訴的理由嗎？

The judge, Mershawn, gave $35 to whatever was Act Blue or whatever, and $15 of that went to the Biden campaign, which is very much against the defendant.

法官默肖恩給了 "藍色法案 "什麼的 35 美元，其中 15 美元給了拜登競選團隊，而拜登競選團隊對被告非常不利。

Judge Mershawn did get himself what we would technically call a CYA memo.

默肖恩法官確實給自己弄到了一份我們嚴格意義上稱之為 "CYA "的備忘錄。

He went to the ethics board and gave them the facts, and they said, you can stay on.

他去了道德委員會，向他們陳述了事實，他們說，你可以繼續留任。

But in my view, he absolutely should have recused himself.

但在我看來，他絕對應該回避。

I mean, it's minuscule amount, but judges are not supposed to give any amount.

我的意思是，這只是一個微不足道的數額，但法官不應該給出任何數額。

He violated the rules by giving $2, forget about $35, and I would just pose the converse.

他給了 2 美元就違反了規定，35 美元就更不用說了，而我只會擺出相反的姿勢。

What if the judge had donated a tiny amount, $35, to Trump 2020?

如果這位法官只向 "特朗普 2020 "捐了區區 35 美元呢？

I think people would be going nuts about that.

I don't know that it quite rises to the level of reversal, because he got this opinion from the ethics board saying, you're okay to stay on if you want.

我不知道這算不算反轉，因為道德委員會給他的意見是，如果你願意，你可以繼續留任。

Not you have to stay on, but you can stay on.

不是你必須留在這裡，而是你可以留在這裡。

But keep in mind, there's 40-something other judges in that courthouse who never donated, and it would have been safer.

但請記住，該法院還有 40 多名法官從未捐過款，這樣會更安全。

I mean, what was the ethics board thinking?

我是說，道德委員會是怎麼想的？

I mean, it seems like, why are they giving him this allowance to give money?

我的意思是，看起來，他們為什麼要給他這個給錢的津貼？

It is a two-or-so-page opinion that's very conclusory.

這是一份長達兩頁左右的意見書，言之鑿鑿。

They basically say, well, it was a small enough amount, and it was more than two years ago, to which I would say, who cares?

他們基本上會說，好吧，那是個小數目，而且已經是兩年多以前的事了，對此我會說，誰在乎呢？