Prosecutors in the Trump case repeatedly mention evidence barred from jury

By Majesty 5 Min Read

On Friday, after the judge reaffirmed that the jury could not hear or see the remarks made by former President Donald Trump on the leaked Access Hollywood audio, New York City prosecutors repeatedly brought up the recording.

The remarks Trump made in the 2005 incident that emerged just before the 2016 presidential election were not, according to Judge Juan Merchan, who decided that airing the recording itself would be unduly biassed against Trump. Before making a brief cameo appearance on a soap opera, Trump used vulgar language on the recording about grabbing women in front of a TV presenter. 

Alvin Bragg, the district attorney for Manhattan, and his staff have alluded to the tape multiple times both in court and in court documents, seemingly in an effort to argue that the harm caused by the stolen tape served as impetus for Stormy Daniels’ $130,000 payout. Trump is accused of fabricating company documents pertaining to Daniels—real name: Stephanie Clifford—in order to suppress her claims that she had an affair with him. Trump has denied the affair several times.

We're now on WhatsApp. Click here to join.

Merchan reaffirmed on Friday that the tape would be detrimental to Trump and cannot be entered into evidence or read loudly in court. 

Prosecutors in the Trump case repeatedly mention evidence barred from jury
Former U.S. President Donald Trump with attorneys Emil Bove

The notorious recording “bears directly on defendant’s intent and motive, both at the time that he and his confederates made the Stormy Daniels payoff and later when they sought to conceal that payment,” according to the DA’s March argument for its admissibility.  

“The release of the Access Hollywood Tape caused a panic within the campaign about the defendant’s electoral prospects and ultimately served as the catalyst for consummating the Stormy Daniels payoff,” according to a filing. 

Judge Merchan reiterated last month that he would not show the jury the footage because it was excessively biassed.

However, the prosecution tried to assert once more on Friday morning that even if the Access Hollywood tape as a whole was declared inadmissible, they still wanted the 2016 Washington Post piece that talks about it to be admitted in order to prove when it was published. 

Reiterating his objection, Merchan said he doesn’t think the video should be aired because the evidence is too strong to have Trump’s voice and likeness attached to the comments. 

Hope Hicks, the White House communications director and former press secretary for Trump’s campaign, said on Friday that the president was most concerned about how the leaked recording would impact his wife, Melania Trump. 

Related: US college students counter anti-Israel hate

Hicks stated, “He was concerned about how this would be perceived at home.” “Mr. Trump genuinely respects Mrs. Trump’s viewpoint. Hicks stated, “She doesn’t always weigh in, but when she does, it’s valuable. 

He probably didn’t want any members of his family to feel offended or ashamed of anything related to the campaign. Hicks subsequently said, “He wanted them to be proud of him.” 

Her evidence, which she submitted to the court in response to a subpoena, may refute the prosecution’s claims that the Trump recording spurred the Stormy Daniels payment because he was worried about the consequences of a negative media story for his campaign. 

Earlier in the day, the defence team contended that Trump’s case could be affected by the recent ruling in the scandal-plagued Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein’s case. 

The New York State Court of Appeals recently overturned Weinstein’s conviction after granting him a new trial. The court reasoned that the trial judge had permitted prosecutors to call women who claimed Weinstein had assaulted them as witnesses, even though the allegations had nothing to do with the entertainment mogul’s charges.

The prosecution has been trying to present material, such as the Access Hollywood tape, that isn’t directly connected to Trump’s alleged crimes, according to Trump’s legal team.

The “Molineux rule” and a “Sandoval ruling” were two legal concepts that were used in the decision to reverse the Weinstein verdict. 

Related: Millions of US families at risk of losing affordable internet

Visit our Latest World News Page for global updates. Follow our Website: On WhatsApp || Twitter || Facebook || Telegram || Townflex || Townflex || YouTube 1 || YouTube 2 || Google News ||

Share This Article