What will jurors take into account when deciding Trump’s fate? Legal experts intervene

After weeks of sometimes explosive testimony, the fate of Donald Trump will soon be in the hands of the 12 New Yorkers chosen to serve on the jury of his first criminal trial.

Mr Trump is charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records over a secret $130,000 payment intended to silence porn star Stormy Daniels in the days before the 2016 election over an alleged affair that she allegedly had with Mr. Trump in 2006.

Prosecutors say Mr. Trump’s former “fixer,” Michael Cohen, made the initial payment on behalf of his boss and that Mr. Trump later repaid it in a series of payments falsely characterized as ” legal fees” for a mandate that did not exist.

Mr. Trump denies the accusations and the sexual relationship with Ms. Daniels.

Throughout the trial, the jury heard from a series of witnesses related to the allegations, including Ms. Daniels and Cohen. Meanwhile, Mr. Trump chose not to testify — despite mulling over the idea for weeks.

The jury will decide the case in the coming days after hearing closing arguments from both sides on Tuesday.

So what will the 12 jurors consider as they weigh the verdict and decide whether to make history and convict a former U.S. president on criminal charges?

The independent speaks with legal experts to find out:

Elements of crimes

The key questions jurors will need to answer are: Did the former president falsify business records and, if so, did he do it in connection with another crime?

Attorney Duncan Levin, who worked in the Manhattan district attorney’s office for years before the case against Mr. Trump, said: The independent that jurors will closely examine whether the prosecutor “met his burden of proof and presented all the elements of the crimes.”

“The evidence is that Mr. Trump provoked the filing of false commercial filings,” he adds. “The other part is that he did it with the intention of covering up a plot to promote his election through illegal means. »

Mr. Levin says “the business records are false on their face.”

“There is evidence that…the reimbursement to Michael Cohen was not for legal services, but for money sent to Stormy Daniels and the figures were inflated, i.e. they were doubled for taxes, which shows the falsity because the reimbursements would not be doubled,” he adds.

Cohen’s testimony, the “centerpiece” of the trial

Because Steve Duffy, jury consultant at Trial Behavior Consulting, tells The independent that Cohen’s testimony — and how much the jury believes him — holds the key to the case.

Over several days on the stand, Cohen said he paid Ms. Daniels on Mr. Trump’s behalf and was reimbursed, with the payments fraudulently recorded.

But Cohen, a proven liar, also admitted in his testimony to stealing tens of thousands of dollars from the Trump Organization.

During cross-examination, he was also confronted with evidence that appeared to contradict what he had said at trial.

That said, the often brash Cohen kept his cool, saying that, yes, he lied when he worked for Mr. Trump, but now he’s telling the truth.

“Certainly, Cohen’s testimony is the centerpiece of the whole case,” Mr. Duffy says, adding that much of the case “depends on” what the jury “thinks about Cohen.”

“His credibility is, in many ways, the crucial issue,” he said.

“One of the peculiarities of the jury system, and one of the reasons it can be criticized, is that different groups of 12 people can do very different things.”

Mr. Duffy adds that Mr. Trump’s decision not to testify is “particularly interesting” because of the former president’s affinity for verbally attacking anyone he considers a threat.

“I think that, from a zero-sum perspective, the decision not to have him testify was the lesser of the two evils,” he adds.

“Very solid arguments”

Levin says other evidence in the case also exposes to jurors the prosecution’s theory that the records were falsified to influence the 2016 election.

It highlights the conspiracy between the former National investigator Boss David Pecker, Mr Trump and Cohen to silence Playboy model Karen McDougal’s story of an affair with Mr Trump.

Mr. Levin says there is ample evidence that “the issue was not silenced for personal reasons – it was silenced so that it would not be made public before the election.”

The text messages, emails and videos all support “the conspiracy,” he said, adding: “I think it turned out to be a very strong argument.” »

Mr. Duffy agrees that the volume of testimony and evidence constitutes pure “corruption” as an asset to the prosecution.

“It’s all so sordid,” he adds. “It just smacks of corruption.”

“I don’t think anyone can honestly say it was honest,” Mr. Duffy says. “Whether or not this violated these specific laws… is a more nuanced question.” But I think the strength of the prosecution’s case is that it all stinks.”

He adds that the defense did not “do itself any favors” by making its public relations argument as much as its desire to “actually win the case.”

Mr. Levin, the former DA lawyer, says he has seen enough evidence to support the charges against Mr. Trump.

The defense failed to establish “an alternative situation that explains the payments to Michael Cohen, or that it was not related to an election, or that the documents were not falsified,” he said.

“There is really nothing on the part of the defense that undermines the charges, and the DA’s office has presented a sufficient case.”