-
Trump was convicted of 34 counts of falsifying company records related to hush money payments.
-
Legal experts said the defense made mistakes and the prosecution told a better story.
-
Trump had previously said he would testify but ultimately did not, which may have hurt his case.
Former President Donald Trump’s historic conviction on Thursday may be partly due to mistakes by his defense team, including failing to take the stand, legal experts told Business Insider.
A New York jury has convicted Trump of 34 counts of falsifying company records in connection with a hush money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels. The verdict made history: Trump is the only American president who is also a convicted felon.
Although the case’s conclusion was significant, three legal experts told BI that the verdict was not a major shock. Two said Trump’s team made a number of mistakes during the trial that could have affected the jury’s decision.
“I can’t say I’m surprised,” said Alex Reinert, an expert on criminal and constitutional law at the Cardozo School of Law. “In the end it was a pretty simple case for the prosecutor.”
Mistakes have been made
Eric Anderson, a former prosecutor and current counsel at Early Sullivan Wright Gizer & McRae LLP, said the case could have gone either way, but he thought the odds were favorable for the prosecutor to deliberate.
“Whoever has the best story wins,” he told BI. “The prosecution’s story was very simple: that Donald Trump did something that on its face could have been perfectly legal, but he did it in an attempt to circumvent a federal election law.”
On the other hand, he felt that the defense’s story simply did not add up. For example, they denied that Trump ever had an affair with Daniels and provided no rebuttal evidence, even though many Americans already believe the alleged affair took place.
Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor and president of West Coast Trial Lawyers, said the defense “overpromised and underdelivered.”
He pointed to opening statements from Trump’s attorney, Todd Blanche, that Rahmani believed suggested an accountant testify and serve as a fall guy. No such testimony was offered.
He also said the defense focused too much on Michael Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer, but that he wasn’t even the key witness. Instead, Rahmani said it was David Pecker, the former publisher of the National Enquirer, who was the key witness for the prosecution.
“He is the one who directly linked Trump to the catch and kill plan,” he said.
Anderson said Cohen’s testimony worked against Trump, despite the lawyer’s potential credibility issues. He said the most credible witnesses are often those who claim to be liars, and that the defense simply didn’t know how to upset Cohen.
Even if the defense had not made these mistakes, it might not have made a difference, Rahmani said. Still, he thought they made it a lot easier for the jury to find Trump guilty.
Not testifying may have hurt Trump
Whether or not Trump would take the stand was a question for weeks, with the former president even saying he would testify.
But when the defense’s case rested last week, Trump had not been summoned to the hearing.
“Donald Trump never went up and said, ‘This is why I did this.’ Failure to do so leaves the jury with only the prosecution’s version of events,” Anderson said.
Not long before resting their case, the defense told the judge they were still considering whether to have Trump testify. Some legal experts previously said testifying would not be a good idea for Trump, fearing he could ultimately commit perjury.
But Rahmani agreed that his failure to speak up would have ultimately hurt his case.
“The defense needed something, some kind of explanation,” Rahmani said of the falsified data.
“I think they would have been better off if Trump or an accountant had testified, ‘This was wrong, but it was an innocent mistake,’” he said.
Rather than claiming an error was made with the data, Rahmani said the defense chose to “lie” in their closing statements and say there were no problems with the payments.
“I think they’ve lost all credibility,” he said.
Don’t expect Trump to be behind bars
Trump’s sentencing is scheduled for July 11. It is highly unlikely that he will receive a prison sentence, experts said. Instead, probation is most likely, or possibly house arrest.
“There is no way Judge Merchan will send him to jail. It was clear when he violated the gag order 10 times and the judge only threatened him,” Rahmani said.
Trump’s team will almost certainly appeal, but their potential arguments are not particularly strong, the lawyers said.
Regardless of the punishment, Trump could still run for president. Being convicted of a crime – or even being behind bars – does not disqualify presidential candidates.
Trump and Biden both said the same thing after the verdict, as they each emphasized the importance of showing up at the polls in November.
Read the original article on Business Insider
