Harvard University Law School professor emeritus and former Donald Trump attorney Alan Dershowitz has weighed in on the jury selected for the former president’s New York “hush money” trial, and he isn’t optimistic.
“I think this is a bad jury for Donald Trump,” Dershowitz told Newsmax’s “Newsline” on Friday. “I think it’s too much of a New York Times, TikTok jury.”
(Video: Newsmax)
Noting that it is “nonsense” to believe that someone can put aside “strong views” about Trump, the iconic attorney said, “This is maybe the best you can do with a New York jury pool, but it’s not a good jury for Donald Trump.”
The “best” the presumptive GOP 2024 presidential nominee can hope for, according to Dershowitz isn’t great, according to Dershowitz.
“I think the best he’s likely to do is a hung jury,” he predicted. “I can’t imagine, although it is always possible, that twelve of these jurors will vote to acquit him if they have feelings about Donald Trump.”
“Again, it may be the best you can get because the jury pool is so skewed,” he said. “With 85 percent of people who voted against Trump, you’re not likely to get a good jury pool from which to select.”
Dershowitz also called out Judge Juan Merchan for allowing prosecutor Joshua Steinglass to withhold the names of the first three witnesses.
Breaking on @MSNBC:
Trump attorney Todd Blanche asked who the DA’s Office plans to call as their first three witnesses. Joshua Steinglass from office refused on the basis that Trump has been tweeting about them.
Judge Merchan said he doesn’t blame the DA’s office. Blanche said…
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) April 18, 2024
“It’s not fair,” he stated. “You have a right to prepare, and if I were Trump’s lawyers as soon as the name of the first question is going forward, I would call for a recess” to give them “two or three days to prepare” their examination.
“You can’t just call witnesses out of the blue and expect that you’d be ready for cross-examination or objections,” Dershowitz said.
Legal analyst Renato Mariotti doesn’t seem to have a problem with it, presumably because it’s Trump we’re talking about here.
“Trump’s attacks on witnesses finally have real consequences,” he wrote on X. “Typically, the prosecution *does* reveal the witnesses it will call the next day. Judge Merchan exercising discretion to penalize behavior that endangers witnesses will be a far more effective tool than a $1,000 fine.”
Trump’s attacks on witnesses finally have real consequences. Typically, the prosecution *does* reveal the witnesses it will call the next day.
Judge Merchan exercising discretion to penalize behavior that endangers witnesses will be a far more effective tool than a $1,000 fine. https://t.co/CNVgBBWc2Q
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) April 18, 2024
Dershowitz, meanwhile, said the trial “from beginning to end” has been “unfair.”
“The gag order is outrageously unfair,” he said, adding later that “criticizing is part of the essence of our First Amendment.”
More important than Trump being able to criticize his judge and jury, “we’re entitled to hear it,” Dershowitz argued. “We have a First Amendment right, also.”
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Melissa Fine
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://www.bizpacreview.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.