well well well

From the article

NORFOLK, Virginia — New York Attorney General Letitia James is housing a second criminal family member at her properties in Virginia — and The Post can reveal she and her big sister were partners in crime.

James’ grand-niece Cayla Thompson-Hairston, 21 — who is an OnlyFans star with a public, X-rated social media presence — was charged in April 2024 with lying about her felony criminal record when she tried to buy a gun in Suffolk, Virginia, according to court docs.

Cayla was legally “disqualified” from owning a firearm due to an August 2020 felony charge of malicious wounding — which Virginia law defines as a crime in which a person “shoots, stabs, cuts or wounds any other person, or by any means causes bodily injury, with the intent to maim, disfigure, disable or kill.”

hompson-Hairston was a juvenile at the time, and the records of that case are sealed.

The weapons charges were later dropped because they learned Cayla’s malicious wounding charge was pleaded down to a misdemeanor, prosecutors said.

In 2019, when Cayla was just 15 years old, she was also caught up in the criminal hijinks of her big sister, Nakia Thompson, 36, who is a wanted fugitive by North Carolina authorities with a slew of arrests, according to docs

Cayla’s social media profile includes photos of her flashing her naked body and also flashing cash alongside a boyfriend.

She recently announced she was pregnant and has posted numerous videos of herself dancing with her baby belly  
exposed.

Both family members — Cayla Thompson-Hairston and Nakia Thompson — live in houses owned by James that have been at the center of federal criminal scrutiny over mortgage documents that James signed.

James is currently facing 60 years in prison for bank fraud and false statement charges after federal prosecutors accused her of lying on the mortgage application for the house where Thompson lives.

James said that the property, which she bought in 2020 for $137,000, was a “second home,” and that she would primarily occupy it.

The feds, however, say she moved Thompson in and collected rent on the property soon after she bought it — and that her alleged lie allowed her to get a better rate on her mortgage, a $19,000 gain.

 

So how many of you lefties are running out to sub to her OF page?

And where's big Pappa Turd to call me a racist?

Geeee another corrupt prosecutor who went after Trump could be going down in flames.

when you read this and then remember all of the news video of her taking the high road on the Trump prosecution.  When was the last time she yelled, "No one is above the law" to a crowd of New York idiots?   Poetic justice.  

WHERE'S THE LINK?!  
Were you too embarrassed because you got the article from a supermarket tabloid?

 
THREE paragraphs of the article were about how terrible it was that James’ grand-niece was legally disqualified from owning a firearm due to a felony charge of malicious wounding.  But in the very next paragraph it says the weapons charges were later dropped because they learned Cayla’s malicious wounding charge was pleaded down to a misdemeanor.  IOW, your stupid article smears her with a felony charge when they knew the felony charge was dropped.  That's how stupid the article is.

 
And you're shocked, SHOCKED to learn she's on OnlyFans.  Never mind that half the hookers on TER are on OnlyFans.

 
And you're indignant that's she's exposing her baby belly?  I bet you were equally outraged when it happened THIRTY-FOUR YEARS AGO.

 
OnlyFans, pregnant photo?  What delicate sensibilities you have, LostSon!  

-- Modified on 10/21/2025 1:15:50 AM

No wonder he's angry all the time.

I dont see what the whole only fans has to do with it or even the gun charge....

 
Unless James had some "political pull" to get the charges lowered or dropped.   IE: Nepotism.

 
But the root of the issue is that James is renting to these people.  When she stated that these homes were for personal use not rental.    BIG PICTURE

 
The other shit is just noise and political bullshit trying to make it look bad or the stigmatism of sex work by the media.  

already confirmed for the justice department that James DOES NOT live there with them.  This is what prosecutors call a "slam dunk" case.  If James doesn't want the max 20 years, she needs to plead out and settle for 3 or 4 years in the slammer.  Maybe she'll get to room with other women who her department convicted and put away.  

Here’s your link

She’s still a partisan HACK!!

The prosecution has to prove FRAUDULENT INTENT.  They have to prove what was in James' mind when she signed the mortgage papers.  Far from a "slam dunk."

 
The only "slam dunk" was when CDL's parents slam dunked his head against the wall which accounts for his permanent brain damage.

Trump without proving fraudulent intent, so are you saying because she's a Democrat, she gets a pass for defrauding the lenders?  Good luck trying to convince a jury she did not know what she was doing.  She owns three properties that she does not live in and claimed that all three are her "primary residence."  Talk about being dropped on the floor head-first.  Another comment by you using your lawyer hat.  The hat is not magic, just so you know.  I'll remind of this being one for failure on your part when she pleads out to get a lesser sentence.  She will probably lose her law license, which means she will probably become a fentanyl dealer like some of her relatives.  

CDL: "She got a judgment against . . . . Trump without proving fraudulent intent," ???????
SOURCE?  
.
Trump Org. was keeping two sets of books ... but that was not intentional?
Trump claimed his 11,000 sf penthouse was 30,000 sf. ... but it was unintentional?
Trump claimed a valuation of only $18 to $28 M on his tax appeals for Mar-a-Lago but claimed that Mar-a-Lago was worth $300 million on his loan applications.
Did you read - sorry, did you listen to - anything other than Fox News about the case?
.
***The appeal did not reverse the conviction.*** The judges questioned the lower court's estimate of the fraudulently earned profits to be disgorged by Trump and Trump Org.

to reverse in the Trump case.   It's a civil judgment about the money.  It the court overturns the Judgment, then it is considered satisfied in full.  No bank in the Trump case claimed to have been defrauded, nor did they lose money on ANY of the Trump transactions.  In fact, they said they would do deals with him again.  

 
The case against James is a criminal case for fraudulent intent in claiming a property was her primary residence when it was an investment property that she was renting out.  She defrauded the banks out of a higher interest rate on the loans because it was her intent to do so.  The two are apples and oranges, but I was just making a point about how EASY it is to get a judgment without fraudulent intent.  

The case was argued by the NY AG ***FOR THE PEOPLE*** OF NYS, not for the banks and lenders. The people of NYS had to pay higher interest rates (and / or subsequent higher prices to the interest-gouged borrowers) in order to keep the banks profitable.  
.
This has been discussed before. The Bank wants to lend its assets and make a return of some percentage to have an annual profit of some large amount. Total Lendable Assets are A-total and they lend portions at different rates -- portion A-1 at 5%, portion A-2 at 7%, portion A-3 at 3%, ... the total amount returned is the sum of the A-n's times their interest rates 1.0n. If one FRAUDULENT UNDESERVING BORROWER gets a lower than legitimately deserved rate, the other honest and deserving borrowers have to make up the shortfall.  The bank doesn't care who gets screwed as long as they meet or exceed their profit goals. That's part of how THE PEOPLE OF NYS got screwed.

...when he tries to show off his knowledge of the law.  He invariably proves what a fucking moron he is.

 
COEUR-DE-LION: "It (sic) the court overturns the Judgment, then it is considered satisfied in full."
That's not what satisfying a judgment means.  If a judgment is overturned on appeal,  it means THERE IS NO JUDGMENT so there is nothing to "satisfy."  

 
"Satisfaction of Judgment" is a legal phrase meaning the judgment was PAID.  Most jurisdictions have a form acknowledging the satisfaction of the judgment:
http://selfhelp.courts.ca.gov/jcc-form/EJ-100

 
COEUR-DE-LION blathers about the banks not losing money and being willing to do business with Trump again.
Who gives a fuck?!  The focus was on Trump's intent.  It was a civil case so all James had to prove was Trump's intent to defraud by a preponderance of the evidence.

 
The James mortgage case is criminal so the prosecution will have the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that it was James' intent to defraud the bank.  Can you see the prosecutor telling the Court as COEUR-DE-LION posts here:
Your honor, "She defrauded the banks out of a higher interest rate on the loans because it was her intent to do so."
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!  What an idiot!  You can't just SAY it, you have to PROVE it.

 
COEUR-DE-LION: "I was just making a point about how EASY it is to get a judgment without fraudulent intent."
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!  What a fucking moron!!!!  You cannot get either a civil judgment or a criminal conviction without proving fraudulent intent.

 
Its unbelievable how many times COEUR-DE-LION can be wrong about the law in ONE post.

Lawyer's hat fails to deliver anything but more confusion.   It is easier to get a judgment than a criminal conviction.  They are not the same.  A criminal conviction requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt.  A civil judgment, which was the result in the Trump case, only requires a preponderance of the evidence, which can be a narrow as 51-49% by the jury, and does not usually require a unanimous jury verdict like a criminal trial.  (In California, you only need 9 of 12 jurors for a judgment.  You need unanimity for a criminal conviction. Other jurisdictions may differ.)

 
In the Trump case, the crooked judge and James could not take the chance of a jury hearing the mitigating evidence from the bankers that they lost no money and would do business with Trump again.  They proceeded by way of a bench trial, where the judge makes the decision, not a jury.  Most civil attorneys will prefer a bench trial of the case is a question of law, and a jury trial if it is a question of fact.  Judgements are more about damages than intentions.  If no one was damaged physically or financially, a demurrer will usually end the case without a trial.  This is why the civil judgment imposed on Trump in this case was so egregious it would never stand before a higher court.   In similar cases prior to Trump in New York, the largest fine ever imposed was $1500.  The statute of being able to proceed without anyone being damaged is unique to New York.  In California, such a case could not even have gotten past the pleading stage.  

Since you admit all lenders are treated differently, how does one borrower getting a better rate penalize other borrowers.?  They agreed to the rate they got.  The bank cannot go back to them and ask for a higher rate once they both sing off on the loan.  The relationship between each borrower and the lender is unique.  The bank is not a pool of money from which all customers "share."  Unless the people of NYS are shareholders of the back, it has no effect on them.  

 
The shareholders of the bank CAN get screwed if the management of the bank is making bad deals, in which case their remedy is to replace the management or file a civil suit..  You seem to understand how banks work and that each borrower has a unique deal with the bank that may be different for everybody else but suggesting the PEOPLE of NYS get screwed by the way the bank is run is balderdash.  They are not shareholders, and if they were, there are remedies for shareholders if they invest in poorly run banks.   This case comes under a unique statute of NYC that authorizes fines for businesses under certain circumstances.  It's intended as a minor revenue source for the city just like speeding tickets to drivers.  

Correct..... especially if the loans come from a private bank.  Not a federal loan program.

 
It is why they offer better interest rates to people who can put more money down, have better credit scores, have better credit history, have better history with the bank, etc.   Some of these practices got curbed or are used less than in the past since banks got killed in the 80's.   But still happens today.

 
Same goes for if it is a commercial loan and residential loan.... which is the issue with James.   Rates are different, tax benefits/deductions are different, etc.  

without proving fraudulent intent.

            In fact, the judge granted summary judgment on liability for the AG on the statutory persistent business fraud count which does not require fraudulent intent:

“The Complaint asserts seven causes of action. The first cause of action is of a type known as a “stand-alone § 63(12) claim.” Consistent with the wording of the statute, plaintiff need only prove that defendants used false statements in business.
…
In a 35-page Decision and Order, dated September 26, 2023, this Court granted plaintiff summary judgment only on liability and only on the first cause of action. Simply put, the Court found that… that intent, scienter, and reliance are not elements of a stand-alone § 63(12) claim; that disgorgement of profits is an available remedy; and that the subject financial statements materially misrepresented the value of the Trump Tower Triplex, The Seven Springs Estate, certain apartments in Trump Park Avenue,40 Wall Street, Mar-a-Lago, and a golf course in Aberdeen, Scotland.”

           So CDL is technically correct, although it should be noted that AG did prove intent to defraud with respect to the other six causes of action. But, if the liability judgments on all of these claims of these claims get reversed on grounds of no fraud intent, , the AG will still have a judgment without fraudulent intent. A very fine but true point.

           And when he says the  judgment would be considered “satisfied” if overturned on appeal, he simply means that Trump will not have to pay the fine- which is also correct. In fact, since the Appellate Division already has vacated the fine part of the remedy, Trump does not have to pay it, regardless of whether the rest of the judgment is overturned, unless the Court of Appeals reverses that part of the AD decision. But this has nothing to with the likely soon- to- be- dismissed James indictment which was filed under different criminal statutes.

It will be interesting to see if it does get dismissed or not.

 
Since Trumps was a civil case not criminal.   Like people have mentioned was it a "criminal" intent or not behind it.