Too late.
Unsurprisingly, the Orange Felon-to-be is now trying to intimidate jurors …
I think it’s only a matter of time before he’s removed from the courtroom entirely, possibly into a jail cell as the judge already threatened.
See Reed v McCord (160 NY 330, 341[1899]) which held that “admissions by a party of any fact material to the issue are always competent evidence against him, wherever, whenever, or to whomsoever made.”
However, most judges would not allow case specific evidence to come into play during jury selection. But certainly it could be used at trial
Deleted - I misunderstood the question.
That’s the schadenfreudee part.
Yeah this was my thought too. Would it matter if Trump testified (unlikely). If he testifies the prosecutor can presumably play the tape and then ask him “hey is the you admitting to this crime”, maybe? If he doesn’t can they enter it as evidence?
Ah. I asked in part because some talking head on MSNBC yesterday that Trump would go to cameras and microphones every day of this trial and basically campaign right in the courthouse and not face any consequences for it. Which I could see if he said nothing material about this case, but I figured had to be wrong about if he basically did what was claimed in that link. Not that I ever trust some pundit on cable news to actually be right about anything these days.
Agreed. Everything needs corroboration.
Re Cohen’s claim that Trump doesn’t attend graduations, here’s fairly recent one he might have remembered since it was widely reported:
Trump and Biden attend family members’ Penn graduation ceremony
When I was foreman, when we all sat together the bailiff said to talk amongst yourselves and pick a foreman.
Not a word was spoken, and everyone suddenly needed to examine an lint on their shirt.
I wanted to get the show on the road, so I suggested drawing straws or any random thing. They decided that I was so smart that I should be the foreman.
I was unanimously elected. Fine.
I think another reason was that the idiot bailiff set a rifle on the table (evidence), pointing at one of us. I immediately removed it and set it in a corner. I do not give one damn if it’s unloaded. It is considered loaded at all times and you DO NOT point it at people. Idiot.
Both times I sat on a jury, the only person who talked to us before and during the trial was the court clerk, who informed us that she (it was a woman both times) was the only person we were allowed to talk to (other than each other, and what goes on in that jury room while the lawyers are arguing fine points in the courtroom, let me tell you, it is like a fucking party in there).
“Anything you say can and will be used against you in court”.
Seven jurors have been chosen. Each side has used six of their ten challenges. The court doesn’t meet on Wednesdays so the circus will continue on Thursday morning. It will go more quickly when the challenges are used up I suspect. A Monday start seems reasonable. They need eleven more jurors (five regular, six alternates)
Nevrrmnd i fkkd it upp
You need to bring the receipts.
Something I learned in the corporate world (large multinational corporation): If it isn’t documented, it didn’t happen.
I’m not sure how much this will count against him. All he basically said is that he paid his lawyer (Cohen) a bunch of money and classified it as a legal expense. That is clearly obvious from the evidence. As I see it, the part that is in question is whether these payments were actually to reimburse Cohen for hush payments, and whether such a payment constituted a campaign expense.
Didn’t Cohen record his conversations with Trump?
I wonder if there are more discussions than what we already know exist.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/04/12/michael-cohen-trump-trial-surprise-00151868
I would rather he got the Bobby Seale treatment.
A Lockheed engineer I knew served as juror and foreman in a civil trial. During voir dir it was evident both the plaintiff’s and defendant’s lawyers were not aiming for the sharpest knives in the drawer – except him. After the trial when he was talking with the attorneys he asked why they were okay with him as the exception. One of the lawyers shrugged. “Somebody’s got to be foreman.”
I don’t know. I mean calling it a confession is a bit hyperbolic, but it does corroborate a big part of the case against him:
I was paying a lawyer and marked it down as a legal expense.
As others have pointed out a lot of the prosecution is going to involve corroborating what Michael Cohen says (as he’s a fairly unreliable witness), and that’s a big chunk of it right there. He paid a lawyer for something and “marked it down” as a legal expense (the implication being it was something other than a legitimate legal expense). Additionally the way he immediately corrects himself and blames it on “some accountant” is presumably telegraphing what his defense will be.
I saw a clip on the news where Trump was testilying outside the courthouse, blabbering to the cameras about how he was handed checks for legal services so he signed them, thinking he was paying for legal services.
I bet his lawyers wish they could literally ( and I mean literally, not that new “literally” that means figuratively) put a muzzle on him.
Because ISTM that the “this was done behind my back, I was clueless” defense is not only unlikely to work because of the overwhelming contradictory evidence, but it precludes the use of defenses that might stand a chance — “like the “I only did it because I didn’t want Melania to find out.”
He really is his own worst enemy, legally speaking. Sometimes I think he acts guilty on purpose.