Consider This: Who made the most compelling case to jurors in Trump's trial?
May 28, 2024
auto_awesome
Fordham law professor Adam Shlahet discusses the prosecution and defense's tactics in Trump's trial, the impact of closing arguments on the jury's decision, and the potential verdict timeline.
The defense in Trump's trial lacked a cohesive narrative compared to the prosecution's compelling storyline, raising concerns about the strength of their case.
Jurors' personal biases towards Trump could influence their verdict, highlighting challenges in ensuring impartiality and fairness in the trial.
Deep dives
Trump's New York Hush Money Trial conclusion
Donald Trump is facing a historic trial as a criminal defendant in New York for allegedly falsifying business records to conceal damaging information before the 2016 presidential election. The Manhattan DA has struggled to articulate its case, with 34 felony counts against Trump. Testimonies from prominent figures like Stormy Daniels and Michael Cohen have been key in the trial. The defense focused on claims that Trump didn't know what he was signing and that expenses were legal, while the prosecution presented a compelling narrative linking Trump to the alleged fraud.
Defense and Prosecution Closing Arguments
During the closing arguments, the defense blended a strategic case theory with a scorched earth approach implicating all as liars in Trump's case. However, the defense lacked a strong narrative compared to the prosecution’s compelling story. The defense's statement suggesting not to send Trump to prison drew a strong reaction from the judge, highlighting potential issues with the argument. On the other hand, the prosecution meticulously laid out evidence and provided a comprehensive view for the jury to consider.
Challenges around the Jury and Verdict
The complexities of finding impartiality in the jurors due to their prior knowledge and opinions on Donald Trump posed significant challenges. Despite Judge Mershon’s attempt to ensure fairness and impartiality, the jurors’ preconceived notions could affect their interpretation of the evidence. The trial expert, Adam Schlarhead, emphasized that the jury process was rapid, and the jurors’ personal perspectives on Trump might impact their verdict, raising questions about the ultimate outcome of the trial.
For this episode of Trump's Trials, we hand the mic over to Consider This. Host Juana Summers speaks with Fordham law professor Adam Shlahet.
Jurors heard closing arguments on Tuesday in the criminal trial of former President Donald Trump. It's now up to them to decide whether Trump falsified business records to cover up an alleged affair with adult film star Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 presidential election.
Topics include: - The prosecution and defense's tactics in their closing arguments - The impact closing arguments could have on the jury's final decision - How long it might take the jury to reach a verdict