Judge in Trump hush money case issues unprecedented jury instruction, sparking controversy
In a surprising turn of events, Judge Merchan presiding over the Trump hush money case has issued a highly controversial instruction to the jury. Referred to as a coup de grace instruction by law professor Jonathan Turley, this move has raised eyebrows and sparked outrage among legal experts and observers.
The instruction in question essentially states that a unanimous agreement is not required for the jury to convict Trump. Instead, the jury could potentially reach a verdict even if they disagree on what specific crime Trump may have committed among the three choices presented to them. This means that a split decision of 4-4-4 would still be treated as a unanimous verdict by the judge.
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey has condemned this decision, calling it absolute insanity. He criticized the fact that the jury was not even provided with copies of the instructions, let alone any notes to refer back to during deliberations. Bailey pointed out the impracticality of expecting jurors to remember the elements of all 34 felony counts without any written guidance.
The jury, comprised of seven men and five women, began deliberations on Tuesday morning without the option to ask for notes or review evidence. Judge Merchan emphasized that it was the jury’s responsibility to judge the evidence and reach a decision, highlighting the gravity of their role in determining the outcome of the case.
The charges against Trump date back to the 2016 election and revolve around alleged hush money payments. The jury was instructed to consider each count individually and reach a unanimous verdict, but the recent revelation that they do not need to agree on the specific crime raises questions about the fairness of the trial.
Critics have also raised concerns about the handling of evidence, as all materials were reportedly loaded onto a laptop operated by two jurors. This arrangement has been deemed questionable, especially in a high-profile case like this.
Defense attorney Todd Blanche faced backlash for suggesting that Trump could be sent to prison based on the testimony of Michael Cohen, whom he described as a liar. Blanche’s remarks were met with objections from prosecutors and sustained by Judge Merchan, leading to further tensions in the courtroom.
As the trial continues, the controversy surrounding the jury instruction and the handling of evidence adds another layer of complexity to the already contentious case against Trump. The outcome remains uncertain, but the implications of this unprecedented instruction will undoubtedly have lasting effects on the legal proceedings.
