In the ongoing criminal hush money trial of former U.S. President Donald Trump, prosecutors are seeking to question him about his involvement in civil cases related to sexual abuse and fraud, should he decide to testify. The decision on whether these topics will be permissible during cross-examination rests with Justice Juan Merchan of the Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office. The concern is whether these inquiries would be too prejudicial and not sufficiently relevant to the hush money case.
The trial, which started this Monday, marks the first criminal trial of a former U.S. president. It centers around accusations that Trump concealed a $130,000 payment by his former lawyer Michael Cohen to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. This payment was allegedly made to prevent Daniels from discussing a sexual encounter she claims to have had with Trump a decade prior to the 2016 election. Trump has consistently denied these allegations, pleading not guilty to the charges and disputing any encounter with Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford.
In a notice dated March 10, the prosecution informed Trump’s defense team of its intent to probe two specific civil cases if Trump testifies. These include a recent case where jurors found Trump liable for sexually abusing writer E. Jean Carroll in the mid-1990s and subsequently defaming her, a verdict currently under appeal by Trump, which resulted in an $88.3 million fine.
Additionally, prosecutors aim to delve into allegations from a civil lawsuit filed by New York Attorney General Letitia James, which led to Trump and his family real estate business being found guilty of fraudulently inflating property values to deceive insurers and lenders. Trump was fined $454.2 million in this case, which he is also appealing.
Legal experts, such as Justin Danilewitz, a partner at Saul Ewing and former federal prosecutor, caution that while some of this evidence could be seen as relevant, overemphasis on these issues might lead to potential grounds for an appeal by Trump. Danilewitz noted that such evidence could unfairly prejudice the jury against Trump without directly proving any legal issues pertinent to the trial.
For more details on Trump’s ongoing legal challenges and the implications of the current trial, refer to the coverage here.
About The Author
Leave a comment