Was the Trump trial and verdict fair? That’s the question everyone’s asking.
And this confession from a federal prosecutor about the trial has raised everyone’s eyebrows.
Doubts Raised in Trump Falsifying Business Records Case
Former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy expressed concerns Thursday about the case against former President Donald Trump, suggesting that if jurors couldn’t agree on which crime Trump allegedly falsified business records to conceal, it indicated substantial doubt.
Judge’s Instructions and Jury Deliberations
On Wednesday, Judge Juan Merchan instructed the jury of seven men and five women, directing them to consider specific pieces of evidence before beginning their deliberations. Importantly, he told the jurors they did not need to be unanimous about which unlawful act Trump was allegedly covering up. This instruction has raised questions about its fairness, with McCarthy and former Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina voicing their concerns.
McCarthy highlighted a hypothetical scenario where four people couldn’t agree on whether the crime involved federal election campaign violations, state election law breaches, or tax law infringements. “If the four of us were having that discussion and we couldn’t agree on that, wouldn’t we say that if the judge’s instruction on reasonable doubt means anything, that if we can’t agree on that, then there’s got to be doubt?” McCarthy said. He emphasized that the inability to agree on the specific crime that elevates the misdemeanor to a felony is central to the case and indicative of doubt.
Gowdy’s Call for Jury Agreement
Gowdy, a former prosecutor, shared McCarthy’s concerns, stating that he would have required the jury to reach a consensus on the specific crime Trump allegedly covered up. “If you want him guilty of the underlying misdemeanor, that’s fine, but tell us what tuxedo you are putting on that misdemeanor to make it a felony,” Gowdy said. He criticized the current situation where jurors could be unanimous in their lack of unanimity, arguing that this undermines the foundation of the criminal justice system.
Judge Merchan has faced criticism for perceived bias against Trump in the trial arising from an indictment on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, secured by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg in March 2023. McCarthy criticized Merchan for not making some documents public, questioning why key elements like the verdict form and jury instructions were not accessible.
The jury instructions in the business records trial were posted Wednesday on the New York Courts website. McCarthy underscored the importance of transparency in these documents. “When I was a prosecutor, I wanted to weigh in and influence everything that went into the jury room,” he said.
He also argued that some documents could be designed to lead the jury to a specific conclusion and that such documents should be publicly available to provide a clearer understanding of the proceedings.
The concerns raised by McCarthy and Gowdy spotlight significant issues in the Trump case, particularly regarding the clarity and fairness of jury instructions and the need for transparency in judicial processes. As the trial progresses to the appellate court system, these questions will likely continue to be a focal point of public and legal scrutiny.
You can watch the clip from the Fox News segment below:
In appellate court trials, one of the main points of focus is whether there was any mishandling of the trial by the lower court. Generally higher courts will want to leave decisions alone if they are reached in a fair trial, with the exception of a handful of cases that reach the Supreme Court because of the implications of the lower court decision.
The fact that so many legal experts, former and current, are pointing to obvious errors in the trial has to be concerning for the prosecution legal team. The verdict for Donald Trump could easily be turned around because the higher courts may agree with the general public that the trial simply wasn’t fair.
However, it’s important to highlight that the trial wouldn’t make it through the higher court systems before the election unless the U.S. Supreme Court made an off-the-cuff decision to pick it up because of the implications it will have on the rest of American society, like the election itself.
Be sure to stay here on the Conservative Column for more updates on major political news.
