Fully analyze the case below, addressing the elements of the laws, required actus reus and mens rea, causation and harm, regular or affirmative defense, and if there is an affirmative defense, which category, and how the perpetrator's actions and state of mind do or do not meet what is required by the law. Arguing both sides - first that the perpetrator does meet what is required by the law, and then that the perpetrator doesn't, is a good idea to maximize points.

Ex-President Donald Trump is accused of making a false entry into his business records to reflect a payment of money as being a payment to his attorney for legal services when it was, allegedly, a payment to be passed along to a woman who was claiming to have had an affair with him, with the purpose of "paying her off" or "buying her silence," and with the further purpose of being able to convince more people to vote for him because those voters would not continue to hear from this woman about her claims of an affair.

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

The case outlined here contributes to several intricate areas of criminal law specifically focusing on fraudulent behavior the significance of actus r... View the full answer