Written by Ashton Snyder on
 May 26, 2024

Legal Analyst Claims DA Obstructed Justice in NY Trump Trial

Former President Donald Trump's criminal trial, in which he stands accused of falsifying business records, has sparked allegations of judicial misconduct.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has come under fire from Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett, who has accused him of "obstructing justice," as Newsweek reports.

Bragg has been central to the high-profile case centered on allegations that Trump falsified business records to hide payments made to Stormy Daniels through his then-lawyer Michael Cohen.

First Criminal Trial of a Former U.S. President

The trial is unprecedented, marking the first occasion a former U.S. president has faced a criminal trial. Trump has denied the affair with Daniels and maintains that the charges are politically driven. He pleaded not guilty to all counts.

Closing arguments are scheduled to begin Tuesday, after which the jury will begin deliberations. Jarrett sharply criticized both Bragg and Judge Juan Merchan, claiming that the two have acted like "co-prosecutors."

Jarrett, in an opinion piece, called it a "sham case" pointing out that Judge Merchan’s rulings often seemed to favor the prosecution. He also accused Bragg of hiding exculpatory evidence and collaborating with Cohen, who serves as the prosecution's key witness despite his own criminal history.

Legal Experts Clash Over Trump's Case

Cohen previously pleaded guilty to multiple offenses and carries significant credibility issues. Criminal defense lawyer Rocco Cipparone highlighted this, noting that Cohen comes with "a lot of admitted and unadmitted baggage."

As expected, the trial has drawn intense political reactions. Many Republicans have called it a "sham" and allege it is politically motivated. Legal analysts Dave Aronberg and Glenn Kirschner, however, believe the prosecution's evidence against Trump is strong.

Aronberg stated that attacks on the prosecutor and judge were anticipated given the trial's success for prosecutors. He emphasized that when evidence is hard to dispute, the defense often shifts focus to vilifying the legal figures involved.

Public Opinion and the Jury's Challenge Ahead

Kirschner went further, asserting that the evidence leaves no room for doubt regarding Trump’s guilt. Despite the polarizing opinions, the evidence must convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt for a conviction.

A recent CBS News/YouGov survey indicated that 56% of adults believe Trump is either definitely or probably guilty. However, achieving a unanimous jury verdict is imperative in criminal trials for proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

As closing arguments near, the jury will soon have the monumental task of weighing the evidence. The trial's outcome not only carries legal repercussions but will also have significant political ramifications. The accusations against Bragg and Merchan add a layer of complexity to the trial. Jarrett's claims of judicial impropriety and concealed evidence have further muddied the waters in an already contentious trial.

With closing arguments on the horizon, the nation watches closely. The jury’s deliberations will ultimately determine the former president’s fate. Whatever the verdict, this trial has already left an indelible mark on American legal and political history.

Author Image

About Ashton Snyder

Independent conservative news without a leftist agenda.
© 2024 - American Tribune - All rights reserved
Privacy Policy