this post was submitted on 07 May 2024
261 points (95.5% liked)

News

37814 readers
1505 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Trump's defense team has moved for a mistrial over Stormy Daniels' testimony

"We move for a mistrial based on the testimony this morning," defense attorney Todd Blanche said following the lunch break.

"The guardrails by this witness answering questions by the government were just thrown to the side," Blanche said.

"There is no remedy that we can fashion ... to unring this bell," Blanche said about the impact of Daniels' testimony.

Blanche argued the prosecutors wanted to embarrass Trump and inflame the jury and was far afield from a case about falsification of business records.

"She talked about a consensual encounter with President Trump that she was trying to sell," Blanche said. "We heard a completely different story."

Blanche argued that the testimony regarding condoms, being "blacked out" and and the "power dynamic" prejudiced the jury.

"This has nothing to do with the reason why we're here," Blanche said. "How can you un-ring a bell?"

The prosecution pushed back.

"Her account completes the narrative that precipitated the falsification of business records," Hoffinger said. "It is precisely what the defendant did not want to become public."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 272 points 2 years ago (7 children)
[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 74 points 2 years ago (8 children)

I have a feeling he doesn't have the best lawyers representing him.

[–] DeepThought42@lemmy.world 81 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)

"I was surprised that there were not more objections," from the defense team he added. "At one point, the court ... objected, because there was no objection coming from the defense."

Either they are bad lawyers or they were strategically withholding their objections in order to file the mistrial motion. I fully expect this to be brought up again in an appeal, assuming Trump loses the case.

[–] rusticus@lemm.ee 29 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Convicted defendents in New York stay in prison during the appeal process. But of course we wont see that fucking happen because money reasons.

[–] Granite@kbin.social 16 points 2 years ago

May it be too late for CheeseTurd by then.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Can they file for a miss trail on the grounds that they themselves didn't do the thing that's expected of them in the time it was expected for them to do it.

Surely a lawyer can't deliberately do a bad job, and then file for a mistrial.

[–] DeepThought42@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

As far as I'm aware nothing will stop them from trying to do that. It's up to the judge (or judges if it goes to an appeal) to decide whether their argument makes sense. While I'd hope that a competent judge will see their shenanigans for what it is, I have no doubt that someone has made that strategy work at some point.

To be clear, I'm not a lawyer, so naturally don't take my word for it.

[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 36 points 2 years ago

Yes, but also in their defense they don't have the best client. It's like they deserve each other.

[–] slickgoat@lemmy.world 32 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I've been following this trial very closely. Trump is the problem. He demands that his lawyers challenge everything very aggressively. He is enraged if his counsel accepts even trivial facts that make no difference either way. The bigger question is why they put up with his tantrums.

Money, probably...

[–] baldingpudenda@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (2 children)

He's not gonna pay. He'll say he lost so why pay. He's got almost 500 million on bond for business fraud, 5 million for rape of Ms. Carroll, I think I'm missing another big one, and he's freaking out at donors for not giving enough.

He's got no field offices set up and only really doing campaign rallies, if you don't count the desperate emails begging for donations. The only thing keeping his "campaign" going right now is the cult.

[–] Jaysyn@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago

He's been having to pay up front since he lost White House counsel.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 31 points 2 years ago

If he paid lawyers, he might get good ones.

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 30 points 2 years ago

"But Merchan says he was also surprised there were not more objections from the defense and that, at one point, he stepped in of his own accord to restrict Daniels’ testimony."

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/may/07/donald-trump-hush-money-trial-fine-gag-order-violations-live?page=with:block-663a734d8f08de1164c8978e&filterKeyEvents=false#liveblog-navigation

[–] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Blanche was actually a pretty respected prosecutor turned defense attorney, its surprising he took the case unless he wanted to get out of law and this was his swansong before transitioning to some sweet talkinghead gig or other well-paid right-wing political operative role

[–] Jaysyn@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago

Blanche used to be a respected lawyer. I hope the payday was enough to pay for the reputational damage he's taking.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

Yeah historically they like being paid and really aren’t jumping at the chance to do polarizing work for free

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 25 points 2 years ago

lol get fucked traitors

[–] hoshikarakitaridia@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I was gonna say, that's hilarious but nah. I think that's what the judge thinks as well.

Legally speaking that's some bullshit.

[–] A_A@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago

Saving us clicks : many thanks :)

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

"I don't believe we are at the point where a mistrial is warranted," Merchan said.