NY: Convicted Felon Donald Trump!

[soundchaser]

Objecting to the photo seems like something of an own goal by the defense? Now it's a big deal, and a witness is going to have to testify about it. Again, I'm no lawyer, but "we're really trying to keep this piece of evidence out" has to be a bad look.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Question for our resident lawyers: with the understanding that juries are unpredictable, what's your sense of the trial so far?  Would you rather be the prosecution or the defense at this point?

[GeorgiaModerate]

New development:

https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1792626614909522333

[soundchaser]

I can't believe this guy lives in Thibodaux, but also, CNN: there's no such thing as "Thibodaux County" (or even Thibodaux Parish, for that matter!)

[emailking]

Objecting to the photo seems like something of an own goal by the defense? Now it's a big deal, and a witness is going to have to testify about it. Again, I'm no lawyer, but "we're really trying to keep this piece of evidence out" has to be a bad look.

Does the jury know they're trying to keep it out though? I assume this all happened in sidebar.

[soundchaser]

Objecting to the photo seems like something of an own goal by the defense? Now it's a big deal, and a witness is going to have to testify about it. Again, I'm no lawyer, but "we're really trying to keep this piece of evidence out" has to be a bad look.

Does the jury know they're trying to keep it out though? I assume this all happened in sidebar.

They would if they were calling a witness back, right? (But it seems like we won't have to worry about that either way.)

[GeorgiaModerate]

The prosecution has rested its case.

[Hindsight was 2020]

The prosecution has rested its case.

Before the c-span guy comes in?

[GeorgiaModerate]

The prosecution has rested its case.

Before the c-span guy comes in?

The defense stipulated the authenticity of the photo, rendering that unnecessary.

[Hindsight was 2020]

The prosecution has rested its case.

Before the c-span guy comes in?

The defense stipulated the authenticity of the photo, rendering that unnecessary.

Oh so it’s allowed evidence?

[soundchaser]

The defense called one of their two potential witnesses, paralegal Daniel Sitko, who works for Blanche. They're already done with direct questioning.

[GeorgiaModerate]

The prosecution has rested its case.

Before the c-span guy comes in?

The defense stipulated the authenticity of the photo, rendering that unnecessary.

Oh so it’s allowed evidence?

Yes, it was admitted.

[soundchaser]

And, unsurprisingly, the defense's second witness is Robert Costello.

[mjba257]

I know the judge said he doesn't want deliberations being disrupted by the long weekend, so if the defense rests their case either today or tomorrow, will court be recessed for the rest of the week?

[brucejoel99]

I know the judge said he doesn't want deliberations being disrupted by the long weekend, so if the defense rests their case either today or tomorrow, will court be recessed for the rest of the week?

After the charge conference, yes, summations will commence next Tues. whether they finish the charge conference tomorrow or Thursday.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Question for our resident lawyers: with the understanding that juries are unpredictable, what's your sense of the trial so far?  Would you rather be the prosecution or the defense at this point?

The prosecution hands down.  It’s not a slam dunk, but the case is in better shape than I expected it to be by now at the start of the trial and I think I’d give it about a 2/3 chance of conviction.  Again, not guaranteed, but certainly the most likely outcome.  

The thing with Cohen is that the fact that he’s a sleazy crook and a convicted perjurer is kinda already baked in.  The lying was at Trump’s direction and he didn’t get special treatment for his testimony in this deal.  Everyone knows he’s a sketchy lowlife, but many of the important parts of his testimony are corroborated to the point that in doesn’t require a big leap of faith to believe him.  

The roughest parts of the cross-examination imo related to things that didn’t really undermine the credibility of Cohen’s testimony itself.  If he being sold as a good man who tragically fell in with the wrong crowd, that’d be one thing.  However, no one was under any illusions that Cohen was a good guy.  I also think the fact that the State got out in front of stuff like Cohen’s skimming and Cohen’s acknowledgement of such (as opposed to trying to minimize it) will play well as he’d be far less credible if he tried to downplay it.  Overall, Cohen’s a sleaze, but he was actually a better witness than I was expecting.

Additionally, everything before Cohen’s cross-examination was an unmitigated sh!tshow for the defense.  They couldn’t even capitalize on the fact that Stormy Daniels came off as a trashy and untrustworthy lowlife (honestly, I think she was a far weaker witness than Cohen).  A good cross-examination of Daniels probably could’ve had a shot at catching her in a perjury trap imo and unlike Cohen, she made claims that I guarantee no juror will believe (ex: “It wasn’t about the money” ).  I think that was a real missed opportunity for the defense.  

A better and more competent attorney would’ve just ignored Trump’s demands that they argue he’d never slept with Daniels and focused on dragging her through the mud until the jurors loathed her and didn’t regard her as credible.  Just plant the seed and see if it goes anywhere.  As a defense attorney, part of my job is to protect my clients from their own ignorance, short-sightedness, and egos.  Sometimes the client wants you to do something that is idiotic and blatantly against their interests and you have to be prepared to stare them down and say “[n]o, I’m not going to argue that and here’s why.  If you can’t accept that, then I’m not the guy for you, but if you want to stay out of jail/prison, then here’s what we’re going to do instead…”

Trump’s lawyers are more afraid of getting fired than they are of doing a piss-poor job and you can’t do right by your client if that’s the case.  In fact, I consider their mindset borderline unethical, but why would a good lawyer agree to handle a client like Trump who never listens to advice, never shuts up, and doesn’t pay his bills?

I also think the State got off to an extremely strong start with Pecker.  It’s hard to imagine how Pecker could’ve gone better for the Prosecution.  

TL; DR: Cohen faced a rough cross-examination to be sure, but it was a far cry from the killshot the defense desperately needed with him.  The rest of the trial was a sh!tshow for the defense, although I suspect that Daniels made a very poor impression on the jury.  

[mjba257]

I know the judge said he doesn't want deliberations being disrupted by the long weekend, so if the defense rests their case either today or tomorrow, will court be recessed for the rest of the week?

After the charge conference, yes, summations will commence next Tues. whether they finish the charge conference tomorrow or Thursday.

How long do you reckon the charging conference will be? I presume the jury does not have to be present for that, so perhaps the jury gets tomorrow off and the day is solely spent on the conference?

[emailking]

Judge cleared the courtroom of press and jury to chew out Costello. He was apparently rolling his eyes at the judge and saying things like "strike it."

[emailking]

The prosecution has rested and i believe they have proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt (misdemeanor and/or felony, all 34 counts). This is technically the bare minimum they need to be at when they have rested.

Please note that this is not the same as I would vote to convict because:

1. The defense still has a case to present. The have the opportunity to sow reasonable doubt.
2. We haven't heard Closing Arguments. This can focus the evidence and the arguments that supports or exculpates guilt.
3. I haven't seen the demeanor of the witnesses as they were testifying. This can be key for assessing their credibility.
4. I haven't deliberated. Being challenged by your peers who have doubts is an essential part of our justice system.

Nonetheless, as an intellectual exercise, I believe the prosecution met their burden. I am convinced.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

I completely buy the prosecution's factual case.

But the prosecution has done almost nothing to convince me that what Trump did constitutes a crime beyond a reasonable doubt as to the interpretation of the statutes and campaign finance regulations.

I understand that this is really not supposed to be something a lay jury is asked to decide.  But if I'm a juror and the law is as unclear as it seems to be in the case, and I've been given almost no information as to how this vagueness should be resolved, I'd have to feel it was my responsibility to acquit.

This is why I wish the prosecution had a least brought up adultery as a possible underlying crime to elevated the falsification of records to a felony.  Under this theory of the case, I think Trump is 100% guilty with no ambiguity in the law, and I would absolutely convict him.  But unfortunately the prosecution presented no evidence that Trump committed adultery in New York.

[emailking]

They'll have to do a good job explaining the law next Tuesday because there are probably jurors who feel the same.

[GeorgiaModerate]

They'll have to do a good job explaining the law next Tuesday because there are probably jurors who feel the same.

Isn't that precisely the judge's role, though, in his jury instructions?

[emailking]

yes but it could be a very dry explanation, I believe the the lawyers can talk about it to some extent too and they can give it more oomph.

[brucejoel99]

I know the judge said he doesn't want deliberations being disrupted by the long weekend, so if the defense rests their case either today or tomorrow, will court be recessed for the rest of the week?

After the charge conference, yes, summations will commence next Tues. whether they finish the charge conference tomorrow or Thursday.

How long do you reckon the charging conference will be? I presume the jury does not have to be present for that, so perhaps the jury gets tomorrow off and the day is solely spent on the conference?

The jury still has to come back tomorrow morning for the conclusion of Costello's testimony (which should take no more than about another hr. or so) before the defense rests, at which point the jury can be sent home for the wk. 'til next Tues. & the charge conference can begin, & take anywhere like 1, 2, 4 or 8 hrs., depending on how contentious it gets (& it will).

They'll have to do a good job explaining the law next Tuesday because there are probably jurors who feel the same.

Isn't that precisely the judge's role, though, in his jury instructions?

yes but it could be a very dry explanation, I believe the the lawyers can talk about it to some extent too and they can give it more oomph.

Yeah, the lowk whole point of summations is basically telling the jury how applying the charged jury instructions on the law to the evidence presented at trial does or doesn't support the case.

[2016]

Trump is headed for aquittal here.
Even Senator Joe Manchin thinks NY Trail doesn't make sense
https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1792629616399544376