The impending criminal trial of former President Donald Trump in Manhattan has drawn significant attention, particularly due to a contentious pretrial debate over the admissibility of evidence. As jury selection commences, the focus has largely been…
The impending criminal trial of former President Donald Trump in Manhattan has drawn significant attention, particularly due to a contentious pretrial debate over the admissibility of evidence. As jury selection commences, the focus has largely been on motions in limine, which are critical in determining the evidence that will be permissible during the trial.
This morning, Judge Juan Merchan addressed a motion from District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s team seeking to introduce evidence of alleged sexual improprieties by Trump that are not directly related to the charges. The case primarily revolves around accusations that Trump falsified business records related to a hush-money payment involving adult film actress Stormy Daniels, aimed at suppressing information during the 2016 presidential campaign.
Judge Merchan denied the prosecution's request to include various other alleged sexual misconduct incidents, deeming them irrelevant to the charges of business records falsification. The decision highlights the legal principle against admitting propensity evidence, which suggests a defendant committed a charged act because they have a disposition towards a certain type of behavior. This principle is particularly stringent outside of sexual assault cases, to prevent unfair prejudice against the defendant.
In this context, the allegations permitted by Judge Merchan pertain only to instances potentially illustrating a pattern directly related to the charges—namely, the alleged affairs with Daniels and Karen McDougal and a related payment to a doorman. These are seen as part of a broader alleged conspiracy to suppress damaging information, a strategy legally distinct from actions taken to suppress negative publicity per se, which is not in itself criminal.
The trial also sees the inclusion of Trump's statements from the Access Hollywood tape, albeit with limitations. The judge has allowed these statements to be discussed but not played in court, balancing the prosecution's..
