In the Weinstein case, the appeals court ruled 4-3 that the former movie producer’s 2020 conviction should be overturned because the trial judge allowed testimony regarding “alleged prior sexual acts and not charged” which were not included in the criminal charges he faced. The appeals court also said the trial judge erred in saying that Weinstein, if he testified, could be questioned about a wide range of other alleged wrongdoing.
Merchan also faced questions about how much evidence would allow jurors to hear about Trump’s behavior with women over time and what topics he might be questioned about on the stand.
“He doesn’t want to risk a reversal,” said Stephen Gillers, a law professor emeritus at New York University. “The decision must take into account and perhaps affect (his) decisions.”
But Cynthia Godsoe, a law professor at Brooklyn Law School, said that while Merchan would review the decision carefully, she thought it was unlikely to have an impact on Trump’s case.
“I’m sure he’s looking into it,” Godsoe said of Merchan. But she said Merchan had already been meticulous about the allegations and evidence he admitted in the trial, putting him on safe ground.
“The judge was very careful to exclude elements that arguably could be introduced, but he’s trying to be very careful, given the context” of a former president being tried, Godsoe said. “He’s definitely conservative.”
Trump was charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records in a hush money scheme to prevent adult film actress Stormy Daniels, real name Stephanie Clifford, from publicly alleging , during the 2016 presidential campaign, that they had an affair. He has pleaded not guilty and also faces three other charges in Florida, Georgia and Washington.
Weinstein, like Trump, is a prominent New Yorker from Queens who was prosecuted by the Manhattan district attorney’s office. In 2020, Weinstein was convicted in New York by jurors who found he forced a former production assistant to have oral sex and raped an aspiring actress. He was sentenced to 23 years. He was also convicted in California in 2022 on charges including rape. and sentenced to 16 years in prison there.
The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office vowed Thursday to retry Weinstein. Cyrus Vance Jr., who had led that office during Weinstein’s trial, said in a statement that he was “shocked” by the court’s decision, saying a lower court previously found that the judge in Weinstein’s trial had authorized the testimony of a witness which was necessary and fair.
The appeal court’s decision relied on two elements: the so-called “Molineux” documents, which discuss evidence of other alleged crimes not charged in the case at hand; and the “Sandoval” material, which covers “bad acts” that can be brought up if a defendant chooses to take the stand and testify.
Godsoe said she thought the appeals court acted correctly in the Weinstein case. In that trial, she said, the “Molineux” witnesses — three women who accused Weinstein of wrongdoing that they say took place years before and after the incidents for which he was charged, allegations that were not included in the charges against him – should not have been called to testify.
She said the witnesses and testimony that Merchan has so far indicated he would allow to be introduced into Trump’s trial appeared much closer to the criminal allegations in question.
Mercan ruled last month that testimony or discussions Daniels and Karen McDougal – who also alleged a relationship with Trump – could be cleared. Merchan wrote that “the evidence and testimony regarding these individuals is inextricably linked to the narrative of events and provides a necessary backdrop for the jury.”
On the other hand, the judge ruled that cases in which women accused Trump of sexual misconduct or assault could not be presented to jurors, describing them as too flimsy and “very, very prejudicial.” And he ruled that jurors would not see the “Access Hollywood” recording, in which Trump can be heard discussing grabbing women by the genitals, although he said he would allow prosecutors to present evidence. Emails from Trump campaign officials about the tape.
Judges must carefully review the evidence presented, making sure the material is relevant and does not prejudice jurors against a defendant, according to Cheryl Bader, an associate professor of law at Fordham Law School. Merchan tried to “thread the needle to reduce the risk of harm in this case,” Bader wrote in an email, emphasizing his decision regarding the “Access Hollywood” video.
But, she wrote, the appeals court’s decision in the Weinstein case offers “a real-time reminder to Trump’s prosecutors and the judge that proving wrongdoing can be a risky proposition that could be turned against him on appeal.”
Merchan said that if Trump testifies, prosecutors could ask him about issues such as a recent civil case in which a judge found that he and others committed a years-long financial fraud; his violations of a silence order in this matter; and his two separate court losses to writer E. Jean Carroll, who sued him for libel.
Legal experts said Merchan appeared to be on safe ground to allow Trump to be questioned on those topics.
Gillers said that going forward, however, Merchan will need to keep the appeals court ruling in mind as he decides other issues regarding evidence and testimony.
“It may not change the decision,” Gillers said, “but he has to factor it into his decision.”
washingtonpost
