The trial of former president Donald Trump ended last week, and now prosecution lawyers and Trump’s defence team will make their closing arguments starting on Tuesday. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg charged Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records to hide a US$130,000 payment to porn star Stormy Daniels in an effort to guide voters’ knowledge about him prior to the 2016 presidential election. The trial hasn’t been without its moments, with Daniels describing in detail her sexual encounter with Trump and a former Trump confident, convicted felon and witness for the prosecution, Michael Cohen admitting he stole $60,000 from the Trump organization because he felt a bonus he received was too small. The judge, Juan M. Merchan, also admonished Trump defence witness Robert Costello, a former federal prosecutor, for commenting on the judge’s rulings and for giving the judge a “side eye.” The burden is on the prosecution to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Trump made, or directed others, “to make false entries in business records, did so with intent to commit another underlying crime and sought to conceal the commission of that crime. They must also prove the 34 records in question were falsified,” per Reuters. Trump’s lawyers need to have presented enough doubt to the 12-person jury to gain an acquittal, or, at the least, have convinced one juror to vote not guilty, triggering a mistrial. In an overview in The Conversation of what happens this week, Jules Epstein, professor of law and director of advocacy programs at Temple University, said, “Closing arguments are not meant to simply regurgitate the testimonies of all 22 witnesses or review the roughly 200 exhibits. For both prosecutors and defence attorneys, the closing arguments serve to tell the jury why the evidence is believable or not, why and how the facts are linked or not and, most importantly, why their decision to either acquit or convict is moral and just.” The moral for the prosecution, said Epstein, is “It was election fraud, pure and simple.” Epstein pointed out the closing argument for the defence is much the same as what Todd Blanche, Trump defence attorney, said, “President Trump is innocent. President Trump did not commit any crimes. The Manhattan district attorney’s office should never have brought this case.” A major objective of the closing arguments from both sides is to focus on the facts, and remove the hubris, such as Daniels’ description of the alleged encounter with Trump and Cohen’s admission of stealing money, said Epstein. “They must cut through the distracting details and tell jurors, in effect, ‘Now you know why this witness was important’, or ‘the document doesn’t lie, it shows you ..…’” he said. Another purpose is to “arm jurors with the arguments they need, either to shut down naysayers or gently persuade those in doubt, for when the real battle occurs inside the jury room during deliberations.” “In my experience over 45 years, the wise path is to start the closing argument with the big picture of ‘What did we have to prove?’ and then answering in a series of bullet points that explain how they proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt,” said Epstein. Once closing arguments are made, Merchan will give the jury an overview of how to interpret the law and evidence while they deliberate. They will also be told they cannot convict Trump if they do not believe he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It must be a unanimous verdict, or Merchan will declare a mistrial. Once the verdict is reached the defence team and prosecutors will return to the courtroom to hear it. At that point, Merchan will affirm the verdict, entering the final judgement, while either the defence or prosecution can ask him to overrule the jury. If the verdict is guilty, it could be several weeks or months until he is sentenced. As a first-time offender of a nonviolent crime, he would likely be released on bond in the meantime, per Reuters. “It is rare for people with no criminal history who are convicted only of falsification of business records to be sentenced to prison in New York. Punishments like fines or probation are more common,” says Reuters. “The maximum sentence for Trump’s crime of falsifying business records is 16 months to four years in prison, but in cases involving prison time, defendants are typically sentenced to a year or less.”
The trial of former president Donald Trump ended last week, and now prosecution lawyers and Trump’s defence team will make their closing arguments starting on Tuesday. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg charged Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records to hide a US$130,000 payment to porn star Stormy Daniels in an effort to guide voters’ knowledge about him prior to the 2016 presidential election. The trial hasn’t been without its moments, with Daniels describing in detail her sexual encounter with Trump and a former Trump confident, convicted felon and witness for the prosecution, Michael Cohen admitting he stole $60,000 from the Trump organization because he felt a bonus he received was too small. The judge, Juan M. Merchan, also admonished Trump defence witness Robert Costello, a former federal prosecutor, for commenting on the judge’s rulings and for giving the judge a “side eye.” The burden is on the prosecution to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Trump made, or directed others, “to make false entries in business records, did so with intent to commit another underlying crime and sought to conceal the commission of that crime. They must also prove the 34 records in question were falsified,” per Reuters. Trump’s lawyers need to have presented enough doubt to the 12-person jury to gain an acquittal, or, at the least, have convinced one juror to vote not guilty, triggering a mistrial. In an overview in The Conversation of what happens this week, Jules Epstein, professor of law and director of advocacy programs at Temple University, said, “Closing arguments are not meant to simply regurgitate the testimonies of all 22 witnesses or review the roughly 200 exhibits. For both prosecutors and defence attorneys, the closing arguments serve to tell the jury why the evidence is believable or not, why and how the facts are linked or not and, most importantly, why their decision to either acquit or convict is moral and just.” The moral for the prosecution, said Epstein, is “It was election fraud, pure and simple.” Epstein pointed out the closing argument for the defence is much the same as what Todd Blanche, Trump defence attorney, said, “President Trump is innocent. President Trump did not commit any crimes. The Manhattan district attorney’s office should never have brought this case.” A major objective of the closing arguments from both sides is to focus on the facts, and remove the hubris, such as Daniels’ description of the alleged encounter with Trump and Cohen’s admission of stealing money, said Epstein. “They must cut through the distracting details and tell jurors, in effect, ‘Now you know why this witness was important’, or ‘the document doesn’t lie, it shows you ..…’” he said. Another purpose is to “arm jurors with the arguments they need, either to shut down naysayers or gently persuade those in doubt, for when the real battle occurs inside the jury room during deliberations.” “In my experience over 45 years, the wise path is to start the closing argument with the big picture of ‘What did we have to prove?’ and then answering in a series of bullet points that explain how they proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt,” said Epstein. Once closing arguments are made, Merchan will give the jury an overview of how to interpret the law and evidence while they deliberate. They will also be told they cannot convict Trump if they do not believe he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It must be a unanimous verdict, or Merchan will declare a mistrial. Once the verdict is reached the defence team and prosecutors will return to the courtroom to hear it. At that point, Merchan will affirm the verdict, entering the final judgement, while either the defence or prosecution can ask him to overrule the jury. If the verdict is guilty, it could be several weeks or months until he is sentenced. As a first-time offender of a nonviolent crime, he would likely be released on bond in the meantime, per Reuters. “It is rare for people with no criminal history who are convicted only of falsification of business records to be sentenced to prison in New York. Punishments like fines or probation are more common,” says Reuters. “The maximum sentence for Trump’s crime of falsifying business records is 16 months to four years in prison, but in cases involving prison time, defendants are typically sentenced to a year or less.”
