According to Newsweek, legal analyst Glenn Kirschner predicted that Donald Trump would be convicted in his criminal hush money trial.
The trial is nearing its conclusion. Closing remarks from both the prosecution and defense are scheduled for three days from now. After that, the jury will begin deliberations.
Donald Trump is confronted with 34 counts of falsifying business records related to alleged hush money payments, with the trial nearing its climax as closing remarks are due soon.
Indicted in March 2023 by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, Trump is accused of concealing payments made to Stormy Daniels, an adult film actress who alleges an affair with him in 2006. Trump denies these claims vehemently.
Michael Cohen, former lawyer and fixer for Trump, has been central in arranging the disputed payments. His credibility is critical, as the jury will soon decide on the matter after the upcoming closing arguments. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges, asserting that the allegations against him are politically motivated.
Legal commentators are split on the potential outcomes. While some signal a possible conviction or a hung jury, all agree that the unpredictable nature of jury deliberation makes the final verdict a complex forecast.
The jury’s decision-making will be pivotal, influenced by detailed jury instructions on legal standards they must adhere to. The trial could end in a conviction, a mistrial due to a hung jury, or an acquittal.
Legal analyst Glenn Kirschner has expressed a strong opinion regarding the prosecution’s presentation. He believes the evidence is overwhelming in suggesting Trump's guilt. Glenn Kirschner asserted: "The evidence has proved, friends, beyond all doubt, not just beyond a reasonable doubt, that Donald Trump committed these crimes."
However, Rocco Cipparone, a legal expert, highlighted the challenges in trusting Cohen's testimony, given his pivotal role and personal stakes in the trial's outcome.
Other analysts, such as Cheryl Bader and Barbara McQuade, have pointed out the importance of the prosecution’s ability to unify various elements of the case in their closing statements. McQuade noted that there is substantial evidence for a conviction, but the final decision heavily relies on the jury's interpretation.
Jonathan Turley, a well-known legal scholar, suggested that a hung jury is quite feasible. Elie Honig concurred, highlighting the higher chances of a hung jury in this high-profile case compared to regular proceedings.
In conclusion, as Donald Trump's trial on falsifying business records wraps up, key aspects such as Michael Cohen’s testimony, complex legal interpretations, and jury instructions remain front and center.
The anticipation builds toward whether the jury's decision will lead to a conviction, an acquittal, or require a new trial due to a hung jury. How these elements intersect will soon become clear as the jury deliberates following the imminent closing arguments.
