[ad_1]
New York State Supreme Court Justice Juan M. Marchan warned Trump that he could be removed from office or sent to prison if he obstructed the trial or failed to appear, and prosecutors said he could be removed from office or sent to prison. The dry rituals of the courtroom only made the trial more surreal, as he said he would seek to prosecute. President Trump disparaged each potential juror even before they were questioned.
Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, openly disrespected the trial when he spoke to reporters in the courthouse hallway. “This is an attack on America,” he declared, calling the incident “a political prosecution that should never have happened.”
But once in the courtroom, Trump was anything but destructive. He often seemed bored or uninterested in the legal jousting that took up the entire morning session.
Shortly after the lunch break, Trump appeared to close his eyes and nod at times as Marchand read a lengthy set of instructions to potential jurors. Then he suddenly sat up and stiffened his posture.
former president’s The most lively moments in the courtroom occurred when the justices were not on the bench. Trump chatted with his lawyers in the defense room, sometimes making them laugh and laugh.
As hundreds of potential jurors waited on separate floors, lawyers sparred for hours Monday morning over what evidence to share and other legal issues big and small. Ta.
It wasn’t until mid-afternoon that the first group of 96 potential jurors entered the courtroom and began the harrowing vetting process. Half of them raised their hands when asked who was fair and impartial in cases involving Trump and disappeared almost immediately.
One potential juror said he had strong feelings about Mr. Trump that could interfere with impartiality. She lives in Harlem and recently started working at Bloomingdale’s. In her free time, she likes to sing, watch TV and “go to clubs,” she said. After her attorney consulted with the judge, she was excused from her jury service. As she walked away, she told the officer, “I couldn’t do it.”
Machan sought to keep the high-profile case calm, urging prosecutors and defense attorneys to “sit back and relax” while explaining the issues that remain unresolved.
But he also ruled that President Trump cannot be excused from trial to attend Supreme Court arguments next week over his immunity claims in one of three other pending criminal cases. The decision angered President Trump. Marchan also refused when President Trump asked for time off next month to attend his son Barron’s high school graduation.
President Trump has repeatedly criticized judges for being biased against him. His lawyers have repeatedly failed in their efforts to remove Mr. Marchand from the case. On Monday, a judge issued a gag order explicitly prohibiting former attorney Michael Cohen, a key witness in the case, from making such comments in response to his recent public comments attacking him. He expressed his displeasure with President Trump.
Prosecutors argued that Trump made three social media posts in the past two weeks that violated the judge’s orders. They asked him to be fined a total of $3,000. He was found in contempt and warned that he could be sent to prison. If he keeps making comments like that.
When Mr. Trump’s lawyer, Todd Blanche, responded that his client must be able to respond to political and social attacks from Mr. Cohen and others, Mr. Marchand nagged the lawyer and asked him where such an exception could be found in the gag order. I asked them to point out whether they had set it up. A judge scheduled a hearing on the matter next week.
Trump’s unique status as a defendant who is also a former president and future presidential candidate came up frequently during the trial’s opening hours. It is the first of four cases Mr. Trump faces and the only one that has not been significantly delayed in pretrial proceedings. I appeal.
Marchan said criminal defendants have the right to participate in closed-door sidebar questioning of potential jurors, but if President Trump were to participate, Secret Service agents would also be present, making it difficult for court officials to pointed out that there would be logistical hurdles.
Prosecutors indicted Trump on 34 counts of falsifying business records, as part of a 2016 attempt to silence what Cohen had secretly told adult film actress Stormy Daniels years earlier. It alleges that there was a criminal plan to conceal the payments.
After Mr. Trump won the 2016 presidential election, Mr. Cohen was reimbursed for these payments, which he classified as a legal recipient. Prosecutors charge that concealing the true purpose of the payment amounts to a crime.
In a case so closely tied to the alleged sexual relationship, lawyers spent much of Monday trying to figure out what they could tell jurors about other alleged indiscretions in President Trump’s life. spent discussing it.
Prosecutors tried to tell the jury that Trump also had an affair with Playboy model Karen McDougall while his wife, Melania Trump, was pregnant with their child.
Trump’s lawyer, Todd Blanche, argued that it was not a crime, had nothing to do with the charges he faces, and would poison the jury.
Blanche said the “risk of unfair prejudice is an order of magnitude higher” due to the “sneaky details of a completely different situation”.
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass argued that the details of the McDougall case are important because they show President Trump’s state of mind and actions when allegations of sexual impropriety surfaced against him.
The judge said he could tell the jury about the incident, but not further details. Melania Trump was pregnant at the time.He said the details were prejudicial, but he reserved his right to change his mind on the matter. Other evidence will also be presented during the trial.
Since the 1980s, Trump’s fame and notoriety have been fueled in part by the tabloids, and prosecutors have used their shady ties to Trump to keep voters in the dark about his embarrassing peccadilloes. It has become clear that the aim is to show that he paid hush money. .
Marchand agreed to allow prosecutors to tell jurors about his 2016 meeting with Trump, Cohen and the National Enquirer in Trump Tower. executive David Pecker allegedly tried to help Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. Prosecutors say the three discussed publishing positive articles about the real estate tycoon-turned-candidate and negative articles about his political opponents.
Prosecutors are expected to use this type of information to support claims that Trump was trying to improve his campaign’s image when he concealed the $130,000 payment to Daniels.That money is said to have kept her quiet during a campaign alleging she had sexual contact with him. With President Trump 10 years ago.
“The point of the Trump Tower meeting was to control the flow of information reaching voters, emphasizing the positives, hiding the negatives, and removing information that would be harmful to Trump’s opponents,” Steinglass said. It was an exaggeration.”
Mr. Blanche disputed that the meeting was not part of the alleged criminal activity, saying such a meeting had taken place. This is common for candidates.
Although they lost that argument, Trump’s lawyers sought to accuse Trump of sexual misconduct in the wake of an “Access Hollywood” recording in late 2016 in which he bragged about grabbing women. He persuaded Mr Marchand that the jury should not be informed about the large number of women who had come forward. .
Marchand called the accusations “very, very biased” and said, “They’re just rumors, they’re just gossip, they’re pure hearsay. Did it actually happen? What’s the proof of that? Nothing. I cannot allow the defendant to be prejudiced based solely on rumors.” It’s not fair. “
Steinglass had argued that his team should be allowed to address the claims in general terms to jurors to show how President Trump has responded to them.
Prosecutors said Trump was “almost obsessed with addressing these allegations” because he feared the article would have a negative impact on female voters.
“This is really important, especially for women voters,” Steinglass argued.
Isaac Arnsdorf contributed to this story.
[ad_2]
Source link
