Trump’s Lawyer requests a retrial over Stormy Daniel’s testimony, Following evidence from adult film star Stormy Daniels, Donald Trump’s legal team pushed on Tuesday to have the criminal case against the former president retried, according to real-time updates from the courtroom
Alvin Bragg (D), the Manhattan district attorney, accused Trump of 34 felonies last year for allegedly fabricating financial records about payments made to Michael Cohen, his former attorney. Cohen claimed to have given Daniels $130,000 in “hush money” in exchange for her silence over an alleged affair she had with the former president.
Todd Blanche, Trump’s lawyer, contended that Daniels’s admissions during the prosecution’s direct questioning were not consistent with her prior remarks made in public.
Blanche informed acting Justice Juan Merchan on Tuesday, “We move for a mistrial based on the testimony of this witness,” asserting that Daniels had crossed the “guardrails” established by the court.
“Much of the testimony that this witness talked about today is way different than the story she was peddling in 2016,” Blanche stated.
Daniels said in her testimony that she “blacked out” during her purported sex with Trump. She also mentioned that they didn’t use a condom and that there was a power dynamic because Trump was physically more significant than her.
“I believe that I lost consciousness. I wasn’t given any drugs. I wasn’t inebriated. I can’t recall,” Daniels said to the jurors. “I told very few people that we had had s*x because I felt ashamed that I didn’t stop it.”
Every time Daniels brought up seeing Trump following the purported encounter in her testimony, Blanche said, “She emphasized that it was in an open place, a public place.”
“That’s not the story she told today,” he said, “she talked about a consensual encounter she was trying to sell with President Trump.” We’ve heard about it now, though. And it is a problem. Could you please unring the bell?”
According to the prosecution, Daniels’ in-depth evidence about the alleged s*xual encounter was “highly probative of defendant’s intent” and his “motive for paying this off.” They also said that Daniels’s testimony was “not a new account.”
She stated, “This is the kind of testimony that makes it impossible to come back from — not even talking about the fact that we’re talking about somebody is going to go out and campaign this afternoon.”
“This has nothing to do with why we’re here, your honor,” he said. “That’s not the narrative she was pushing when she testified today about consent and danger. Sorry, but she wasn’t selling that kind of story.”
“I don’t think any individual can listen to what that witness said, think that has anything to do with the accusations, and the entire testimony is so prejudiced that you run the very high risk of the jury not being able to pay attention to the evidence that does matter,” Blanche stated.
Merchan dismissed Blanche’s motion for a mistrial and partially blamed the defense for not raising more issues when the prosecution was questioning Daniels.
“As the presiding judge, it is my duty to ensure the fairness of this trial. While I acknowledge that there may have been some issues with the witness’s testimony, I am not yet convinced that a mistrial is the appropriate course of action,” Merchan asserted.
Source: Blaze media
