CNN Legal Expert Identifies HUGE Problem For Alvin Bragg
President Donald Trump faces 34 felony counts for allegedly falsifying business records tied to payments made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels to prevent her from disclosing an alleged affair during the 2016 presidential campaign. However, CNN legal expert Arthur Aidala pointed out a potential flaw in the prosecution’s evidence — the absence of Trump’s signature on crucial documents.
Key documents lacking former President Trump’s signature could significantly weaken Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case against him, Aidala suggested on Monday. The criminal defense attorney, known for representing high-profile figures such as Harvey Weinstein and Rudy Giuliani, spoke at length about the challenges faced by prosecutors in securing a conviction.
Speaking to CNN’s Anderson Cooper, Aidala was skeptical about the reliability of the prosecution’s witnesses, specifically pointing out the credibility issues surrounding Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels. “You can’t believe Michael Cohen. You can’t believe Stormy Daniels,” he said, indicating that the defense might focus on undermining their testimonies to bolster their case.
The defense’s strategy could also lean heavily on judicial instructions to sway the jury, as Aidala noted, “The judge is going to tell you this and the judge is going to tell you that, and we agree. And if you listen to the judge, there’s no way that they can prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Amidst his critique, Aidala revealed a tactical focus possibly aimed at securing a hung jury rather than a straightforward acquittal: “Arthur, I know you’ve said that if you were on the Trump defense, you wouldn’t be looking for an outright acquittal, you’d be aiming for a hung jury,” said Cooper. This strategy would involve planting enough doubt among the jurors to prevent a unanimous verdict.
On Friday one of the jurors selected the previous day told Judge Merchan that she would not be able to remain impartial throughout the trial following quizzing by family members asking if she had been selected. Another admitted he may not have been fully truthful when asked previously about whether he or a relative has a criminal record.
