Jurors in Trump’s hush money trial zero in on testimony of key witnesses as deliberations resume
NEW YORK — The jury in Donald Trump’s hush money trial will resume deliberations Thursday after asking for potentially crucial testimony about the alleged hush money scheme at the heart of the history-making case.
The 12-member jury deliberated for about 4 1/2 hours Wednesday without reaching a verdict.
In addition to asking to repeat testimony from a tabloid publisher and Trump’s former lawyer and personal fixer, the jury also requested to hear at least some of the judge’s hours-long instructions, which were intended to guide them on the law , to revise.
It is unclear how long the deliberations will last. A guilty verdict would deliver a stunning legal reckoning for the presumptive Republican presidential nominee as he tries to reclaim the White House, while an acquittal would mark a major victory for Trump and embolden him on the campaign trail. Because the verdicts must be unanimous, it is also possible that the case could end in a mistrial if the jury cannot reach a consensus after days of deliberation.
Trump struck a pessimistic tone after leaving the courtroom following the reading of jury instructions, repeating his claims of a “very unfair trial” and saying: “Mother Teresa couldn’t refute this charge, but we’ll see. We’ll see how we do.”
He remained in the courthouse during the deliberations, posting complaints about the trial on his social media network and quoting legal and political commentators who view the case in his favor. He did not testify in his own defense, a fact the judge told jurors they could not take into account.
Trump is charged with 34 counts of falsifying corporate records at his company in connection with an alleged scheme to cover up potentially embarrassing stories about him during his 2016 Republican presidential election campaign.
The charge, a misdemeanor, stems from fees paid to then-Trump attorney Michael Cohen after he made a $130,000 hush-money payment to porn actor Stormy Daniels to silence her claims that she and Trump had sex in 2006. Trump is accused of misrepresenting Cohen’s repayments. as legal fees to hide the fact that they were bound by a hush money payment.
Trump has pleaded not guilty and claims the Cohen payments were for legitimate legal services. He has also denied the alleged extramarital sexual encounter with Daniels.
To convict Trump, the jury would have to unanimously find that he made a fraudulent entry in his company’s records, or caused someone else to do so, and that he did so with the intent to commit or conceal another crime.
Prosecutors say Trump committed or concealed election law violations that make it unlawful for two or more conspirators to “unlawfully promote or prevent the election of any person to public office.”
While the jury must agree unanimously that something illegal was done to promote Trump’s election campaign, they do not have to be unanimous on what that illegal thing was.
The jurors — a diverse cross-section of Manhattan residents and professional backgrounds — often seemed fascinated by testimony during the trial, including from Cohen and Daniels. Many took notes and watched intently as witnesses answered questions from Manhattan prosecutors and Trump’s lawyers.
Jurors began deliberating after a marathon day of closing arguments in which a prosecutor spoke for more than five hours, underscoring the burden the district attorney’s office faces in establishing Trump’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The Trump team does not have to establish his innocence to avoid a conviction, but must instead rely on at least one juror ruling that prosecutors have not sufficiently proven their case.
In their first burst of communication with the court, jurors asked to repeat testimony from Cohen and former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker about an August 2015 meeting with Trump at Trump Tower, where the tabloid boss agreed to be the “eyes and ears” of his little boy. President’s campaign.
Pecker testified that the plan included identifying potentially damaging stories about Trump so they could be squashed before they were published. That, according to prosecutors, was the start of the catch-and-kill scheme at the heart of the case.
Jurors also want to hear Pecker’s account of a phone call he said he received from Trump discussing a rumor that another outlet had offered to buy former Playboy model Karen McDougal’s alleged story that she wrote in the mid-2000s had had a years-long affair with Trump. . Trump has denied the affair.
Pecker testified that Trump told him, “Karen is a nice girl” and asked, “What do you think I should do?” Pecker said he responded, “I think you should buy the story and take it off the market.” He added that Trump told him he doesn’t buy stories because they always come out and that Cohen would be in touch.
The publisher said he left the conversation assuming Trump knew the details of McDougal’s claims. Pecker said he believed the story was true and that it would have been embarrassing for Trump and his campaign if it had been made public.
National Enquirer’s parent company, American Media Inc., ultimately paid McDougal $150,000 for the rights to her story in a deal that also included writing and other opportunities with the fitness magazine and other publications.
The fourth item jurors asked for is Pecker’s testimony about his decision in October 2016 to back out of an agreement to sell the rights to McDougal’s story to Trump through a company Cohen created for the transaction, known as a ‘transfer of rights’.
“I called Michael Cohen and told him that the agreement, the assignment agreement, is not going through. I’m not moving forward. It’s a bad idea, and I want you to tear up the agreement,” Pecker testified. “He was very, very angry. Very upset. Actually yelling at me.”
Pecker testified that he repeated to Cohen that he was not going through with the agreement.
He said Cohen told him, “The boss will be very angry with you.”
___
Follow the AP’s coverage of former President Donald Trump at https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump