It may have seemed to many that former President Donald Trump would escape from the traps set by his Democrat enemies. Jack Smith’s cases are on hold and Fulton County DA Fani Willis in Georgia is involved in an appeal of the decision not to remove her from the RICO case she brought against Donald Trump, delaying that matter as well.
But leave it to New York to succeed where everyone else has failed.
At this point, unless you’ve been away on a camping or fishing trip with no access to media, you know that the former 45th President of the United States has been convicted of all 34 counts of Falsifying Business Records, some of these counts being felonies.
Naturally, Democrats had a field day, gloating over and celebrating their victory. “Trump shut your mouth!” California Congressperson Maxine Waters stated on X. “Just shut your mouth, you’re convicted on all counts!” Then there were the reactions of some members of the public; “Vivica Jimenez, who was among a group of anti-Trump protesters at the court [said] she was ‘happy and relieved’ with the guilty verdict. ‘It’s been a long time waiting for this,’ Jimenez said. ‘It’s very emotional.’ Jamie Bauer, another anti-Trump protester, also praised the verdict. ‘Justice is being served and Trump is being held accountable,’ Bauer said.”
But, as is so often the case, Law Professor and former US Attorney Jonathan Turley states the facts clearly and succinctly: “Trump was convicted in a trial with a Biden donor judge, who has a daughter who is a major Democratic operative, a lead prosecutor previously paid as a DNC political consultant selected in a…jury district that voted roughly 90% against Trump.”
In April, we discussed the fact that New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan should have been removed from hearing the case against Donald Trump based upon his contributions (regardless of the amount) to the Biden campaign and several anti-Republican organizations, as well as his daughter’s political activities. This issue will no doubt be one ground for the inevitable appeal of Donald Trump’s conviction.
What other grounds are there for an appeal of this clearly erroneous verdict?
Among the plethora of issues available to the former President, there is one issue in particular that has the most promise – The instructions given to the jury were incorrect, and misstated the law applicable to the case.
These instructions were also the first time that the charges against Donald Trump were made clear, a violation of the former president’s right to a fair trial, and to be informed of the crimes with which he was accused.
In my book, The Making of a Martyr, an Analysis of the Indictments of Donald Trump, at both Chapters 5 and 7, I discuss the legal insufficiency of the Indictment brought against the former President, the document which formed the basis for his prosecution. I noted that “[u]nder Section 200.50 of the New York State Criminal Procedure Law, ‘an indictment must contain…(a) statement in each count that the grand jury…accuses the defendant…of a designated offense,” as well as “(a) plain and concise factual statement in each count which… asserts facts supporting every element of the offense charged and the defendant`s…commission thereof with sufficient precision to clearly apprise the defendant…of the conduct which is the subject of the accusation.’”
I also stated that “a review of the New York County indictment revealed that “Donald Trump is accused of causing a false entry to be made in [his] business records…for the purpose of committing another crime…What other crime? The indictment does not say… Simply put, how is former President Trump to prepare a defense, if he is not informed of the ‘other crime’ he intended to commit or conceal when he allegedly falsified his business records?”
This problem with the indictment was never resolved while the case was pending. However, at the end of trial, the prosecutors and Judge finally revealed to the defense the theory of their case, which is described by Professor Turley in this way; “Merchan told the jury members that they [could] base their verdict on any one of three vaguely defined crimes of a federal election violation, falsification of business records or taxation violations. Thus, the jury could have divided 4-4-4 on what actually occurred but the verdict was still treated as unanimous by Merchan to convict Trump.”
Sure enough, Judge Merchan’s instructions state that “[u]nder [New York State] law, although the People must prove an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof, they need not prove that the other crime was in fact committed, aided, or concealed.” This is true so far as it goes, however, the “other crime” the former President intended to conceal is finally revealed – “a violation of New York Election Law section 17-152 [which] provides that any two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means…”
Judge Wilson’s article concludes tomorrow