Trump Indicted by Manhattan District Attorney

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Trial date of March 25 is confirmed (jury selection will start then).

[Voronwë the Faithful]

[N.E. Brigand]

From the thread about the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case:

Meanwhile, Trump and the other defendants have filed a motion to delay filing their briefs on most of the motions to dismiss the indictment by 10 days, based on part on the existing Trump trial in NY, and other excuses that they have known about for a long time. The SCO has strongly opposed the motion, but ... Cannon. We'll see what she does. In the grand scheme of things it is not that big a deal, but there is no real basis for this motion other than further delay.

And at the same time Trump is citing the Manhattan case as an excuse to delay briefs in Florida, up in New York he filed to adjourn the hush money trial on the grounds that some key evidence against him are comments that he tweeted while he was President and which he therefore is immune for -- or which the Supreme Court may find he immune for (but we won't know that until June).

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Looks like this case is going to be delayed, too.

[N.E. Brigand]

Because the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of New York only lately provided 100,000 pages of documents -- and next week will be providing more -- that may be relevant and which Bragg's office says they requested a year ago. SDNY has known for months what date this trial was scheduled. What was Damian Williams thinking?

[N.E. Brigand]

Because the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of New York only lately provided 100,000 pages of documents -- and next week will be providing more -- that may be relevant and which Bragg's office says they requested a year ago. SDNY has known for months what date this trial was scheduled. What was Damian Williams thinking?

OK, I see that Bragg says this is largely Trump's doing. His office made this request a year ago and were provided with what they understood to be the required discovery, which they turned over to Trump's team in June 2023. It was only recently that Trump's lawyers said: we want and are entitled to more.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

It's more the U.S. Attorney's office's fault than anyone else's; they should have provided this information to the DA's office long ago. See, e.g., this thread from Allison Gill.



Trump is requesting a delay of at least 90 days, though I doubt the judge will do that.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Judge Merchan has delayed the trial 30 days from today (so 20 days from the original date), and has ordered a hearing on March 25 (the original trial date) on Trump's motion to dismiss for discovery violations, at which time he may postpone the trial further.

https://www.nycourts.gov/LegacyPDFS/pre ... -15-24.pdf

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Judge Merchan has ruled that the DA's office was not at fault for the late production of documents from the U.S. Attorney's office, and that trial will begin on April 15. Trump's lawyer Todd Blanche is making yet another motion for a delay because of "pretrial publicity". The judge said that he could and that the D.A's office would have a week to respond. I can't imagine that there is any chance that the judge will grant that.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

The latest gag order against Trump (issued the same day that Trump attacked both Judge Merchan and the judge's daughter, though it is unclear whether they are covered by the order:

[Voronwë the Faithful]

More extraordinary is the judge's statement in his written order on Trump's motion to vacate his previous order requiring Trump's lawyers to get the court's permission before bringing any further motions.

https://www.nycourts.gov/LegacyPDFS/pre ... Vacate.pdf

This Court advises counsel that it expects and welcome zealous advocacy and creative lawyering. See Application of Giampa, 147 Mise.2d 397 [Sup Ct, Bronx Cnty April 16, 1990], However, the Court also expects those advocates to demonstrate the proper respect and decorum that is owed to the courts and its judicial officers and to never forget that they are officers of the court. As such, counsel is expected to follow this Court’s orders. Even “[a] good faith belief that a court order is improper or unlawful will not render the order unlawful nor will it excuse willful disobedience.” Matter of Rankin,78 Misc3d 337 [Sup Ct, Kings Cnty Jan 3, 2023]. As such, “a court of record has power to punish for a criminal contempt, a person guilty7 of ... [w]illful disobedience to its lawful mandate.” Id. citing to Judiciary Law §750(3). This Court emphasizes that it hopes for and fully expects zealous advocacy from counsel as well as spirited contribution from witnesses and parties alike. Nonetheless, the Court expects that the line between zealous advocacy and willful disregard of its orders will not be crossed to the courts and its judicial officers and to never forget that they are officers of the court. As such, counsel is expected to follow this Court’s orders. Even “[a] good faith belief that a court order is improper or unlawful will not render the order unlawful nor will it excuse willful disobedience.” Matter of Rankin,78 Misc3d 337 [Sup Ct, Kings Cnty Jan 3, 2023]. As such, “a court of record has power to punish for a criminal contempt, a person guilty of ... [w]illful disobedience to its lawful mandate.” Id. citing to Judiciary Law §750(3). This Court emphasizes that it hopes for and fully expects zealous advocacy from counsel as well as spirited contribution from witnesses and parties alike. Nonetheless, the Court expects that the line between zealous advocacy and willful disregard of its orders will not be crossed.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Prosecutors have asked Judge Merchan to clarify whether the gag order that he issued covers his family members.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Trump's team, of course, says it does not.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

She could be a very interesting witness, indeed.

[N.E. Brigand]

[Hope Hicks] could be a very interesting witness, indeed.

Michael Cohen, Hope Hicks ... can we go for the hat trick and get Giorgi Rtskhiladze into the flow?

(While that would be very interesting, I don't really see the case dripping in that direction.)

- - - - - - - - - -
Meanwhile, a new filing from Alvin Bragg says that Donald Trump's "dangerous, violent, and reprehensible rhetoric fundamentally threatens the integrity of these proceedings"; Bragg wants Judge Merchan to scale up his gag order.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Michael Cohen, Hope Hicks ... can we go for the hat trick and get Giorgi Rtskhiladze into the flow?

So far as I know, Giorgi Rtskhiladze doesn't have anything to do with this case, and Judge Merchan has repeatedly banned any material related to the Mueller report from being introduced into evidence.

[N.E. Brigand]

Michael Cohen, Hope Hicks ... can we go for the hat trick and get Giorgi Rtskhiladze into the flow?

So far as I know, Giorgi Rtskhiladze doesn't have anything to do with this case, and Judge Merchan has repeatedly banned any material related to the Mueller report from being introduced into evidence.

Well, I posted that part mostly for fun. (Also because the name Rtskhiladze seems not to have been mentioned here before.) That said, I could imagine, albeit with a very, very small probability of happening, that this case could include testimony in which Cohen and/or Hicks are asked about the various pressures they were dealing with in October 2016 that would make it imperative that Stormy Daniels be paid off to keep her story quiet, and thus that Hicks and Cohen note that, on or about the same day the Access Hollywood news was breaking, Hicks was getting questions from someone about the existence of salacious Russian tapes, which she handed off to Cohen.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

As expected, Trump is responding to the DA's attempt to hold him responsible for his escalating attacks on Judge Merchan's daughter but requesting permission to renew his motion to recuse Judge Merchan.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

[Voronwë the Faithful]

This is the case summary that Judge Merchan plans to give to prospective jurors:

PeOPLE, V. DONALD TRUMP
CASE SUMMARY
'The Defendant, Donald Trump, is charged with 34 counts of Falsifying Business
Records in the First Degree.
The allegations are in substance, that Donald Trump falsified business records to conceal an agreement with others to unlawfully influence the 2016 presidential election. Specifically, it is alleged that Donald Trump made or caused false business records to hide the true nature of payments made to Michael Cohen, by characterizing them as payment for legal services rendered pursuant to a retainer agreement. The People allege that in fact, the payments were intended to reimburse Michael Cohen for money he paid to Stephanie Clifford, also known as Stormy Daniels, in the weeks before the presidential election to prevent her from publicly revealing details about a past sexual encounter with Donald Trump.

Donald Trump has pleaded not guilty and denies the allegations.

In other words, election interference, part 1.