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.”

  • Windex007@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m not a lawyer, so interested in learning…

    Isn’t this what the purpose of objecting is? If the defense fails to object while it’s happening… Isn’t that kinda on them?

        • macarthur_park@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          1 year ago

          Maybe he could if he didn’t blow all his money on avocado toast paying hush money to porn stars. Oh and the defamation civil suits with the woman he raped…

          • slickgoat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Don’t forget he stiffed Michael Cohen out of some of those hush money payments. It was probably a reflective move from a lifetime of dumping on friends.

        • wjrii@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          This, but only partly because of his own wealth/liquidity. He’s a difficult client, late at paying his bills, and being associated with him smears your name with half the country, including even a not-insignificant percentage of rich assholes…

          From the lawyers that don’t reject him at any hourly rate, he’s likely now getting the “Fuck you” price, where you don’t want the job but you put out a crazy number to avoid simply saying no.

    • mad_asshatter@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes. The judge pointed it out to them:

      “I was surprised that there were not more objections” from the defense team, the judge added.

      “At one point, the court … objected, because there was no objection coming from the defense,” he said

    • hoshikarakitaridia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes. Mistrial is only even something irreversible happens and the trial became unfair. If you didn’t call bullshit at the time, you are not allowed to complain about everything later. And because you didn’t object, there’s also no preserved issue for appeal.

      Btw I think the judge would be able to base their opinion in latches. But I might be wrong.

      • rusticus@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        But the defendent is in prison during the appeal. Not sure they thought that through.