new york– Stormy Daniels on Tuesday nearly derailed Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case in which she testified about her alleged “sexual encounters” with former President Donald Trump, frustrating the judge and swaying the defense. He urged a motion for a miscarriage of justice.
Daniels refused to acknowledge a miscarriage of justice, but Judge Juan Melchán, who has not been critical of prosecutors, disapproved of Daniels’ actions on stage and acknowledged many of the objections raised by the defense during her cross-examination. , agreed when a motion for miscarriage of justice was filed. Many details would have been better left “unsaid.” Daniels was unapologetic on stage, speaking quickly and, despite being told by Marchan to slow down multiple times, Marchan offered elaborate explanations, detours with side stories, and expressed disdain for Trump. or insert humiliating details showing the
As the jury was reminded through Monday’s testimony from Trump Organization accounting staff, this case is about corporate records, at least according to the indictment. Specifically, Trump allegedly falsified business records in order to reimburse former lawyer Michael Cohen, who paid Daniels to keep quiet about the alleged contact before the 2016 election. (Related: Judge denies Trump lawyer’s mistrial claim after Stormy Daniels testimony)
Mr Marchand says he does not think we have reached the point where a miscarriage of justice is warranted.
He agreed there were things it would have been better not to say, but said he accepted most of the defense’s objections.
“I’m surprised there wasn’t more opposition,” he said.
— Katelyn Richardson (@katesrichardson) May 7, 2024
But Daniels’ time on the stand threatened to turn the courtroom into a gossip column. Asked about having dinner together in a hotel suite, she said Trump greeted her in his pajamas.
“I immediately teased him,” she said, noting that he changed at her request. Daniels recalled calling him “arrogant and arrogant” and bashing him in a magazine.
She detailed that she allowed him to go to the bathroom and when she returned, she found him on the bed wearing boxer shorts. “I thought, ‘Oh my God, what did I read wrong here?'” she said.
Mr. Daniels’ apparent penchant for performance on the stand was compounded by prosecutor Susan Hoffinger’s questions, which did not necessarily seem designed to elicit useful answers. “Was he wearing a condom?” What was his relative height? The defense frequently objected. Machan accepted most requests. At one point, Mr Machan interrupted his testimony and said: “It is completely unnecessary for us to elaborate here.”
These were pieces of information that the defense later described as “prejudicial” to the jury, and called for a mistrial because the court had no choice but to “ring this bell.” Defense attorney Todd Blanche said the only reason he asked these questions, other than “pure embarrassment,” was to “stimulate the jury.”
“The guardrails of this witness answering questions from the government were just thrown to the side,” Blanche said.
Daniels took on a combative tone during cross-examination when defense attorney Susan Necheres suggested that he was motivated by money and hatred of President Trump, but Daniels flatly acknowledged the latter. Ta.
Necheres: Do you remember testifying that you started doing porn because you wanted more money?
DANIELS: Don’t we all want more money from our jobs?Mr. Necheres is trying to show that he is motivated by money.
Necheres: Is it correct to say that you hate President Trump?
Daniels: Yes.— Katelyn Richardson (@katesrichardson) May 7, 2024
Daniels became increasingly defiant after Necheles suggested that her story that she was threatened not to talk about her encounter with President Trump in 2011 was false.
“Was this whole story made up?” Nechels concluded aloud. “No, I’m not making anything up,” Daniels shot back.
Necheres focused on the details of why she did not tell her husband about the threats against their young daughter.
The defense will resume cross-examination on Thursday.
All content produced by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent, nonpartisan news distribution service, is available free of charge to legitimate news publishers with large audiences. All republished articles must include our logo, reporter byline, and DCNF affiliation. If you have any questions about our guidelines or our partnership, please contact us at licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
