NEW YORK (AP) — Jury deliberations began Wednesday in Donald Trump’s hush money trial, placing the outcome of the history-making case in the hands of a dozen New Yorkers who have vowed to be fair and impartial in the face of their unprecedented task.
Just hours after embarking on their closed-door discussions, the jury returned with separate notes asking to rehear testimony about the alleged hush money scheme at the heart of the case and to rehear legal instructions from the judge that are meant to guide them in their deliberations.
The notes were the sole communication with the court since the jury of seven men and five women was sent to a private room just before 11:30 a.m. to begin weighing a verdict in the historic case. Though the deliberations are secret, notes are used to send questions or messages about the case and to notify the court of a verdict, or if they are unable to reach one.
“It is not my responsibility to judge the evidence here. It is yours,” Judge Juan M. Merchan told jurors earlier in the day before dispatching them to begin deliberations. He also reminded them of their vow during the selection process to judge the case fairly and impartially.
Trump struck a pessimistic tone after leaving the courtroom following an hourlong reading of jury instructions, repeating his assertions of a “very unfair trial” and saying: “Mother Teresa could not beat those charges, but we'll see. We'll see how we do."
Trump and his lawyers, along with prosecutors, were instructed to remain inside the courthouse during deliberations. While waiting behind closed doors there, he continued making a series of posts on his social media network complaining about the trial and quoting legal and political commentators who view the case in his favor.
In one post, written in all-capital letters, he said: “I don't even know what the charges are in this rigged case — I am entitled to specificity just like anyone else." He added, “There is no crime!”
Trump is charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records at his company in connection with an alleged scheme to hide potentially embarrassing stories about him during his 2016 Republican presidential election campaign.
The charge, a felony, arises from reimbursements paid to then-Trump lawyer Michael Cohen after he made a $130,000 hush money payment to porn actor Stormy Daniels to silence her claims that she and Trump had sex in 2006. Trump is accused of misrepresenting Cohen’s reimbursements as legal expenses to hide that they were tied to a hush money payment.
Trump has pleaded not guilty and contends the Cohen payments were for legitimate legal services. He has also denied the alleged extramarital sexual encounter with Daniels.
To convict Trump, the jury would have to find unanimously that he created a fraudulent entry in his company’s records, or caused someone else to do so, and that he did so with the intent of committing or concealing another crime.
The crime prosecutors say Trump committed or hid is a violation of a New York election law making it illegal for two or more conspirators “to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means.”
While the jury must unanimously agree that something unlawful was done to promote Trump’s election campaign, they don’t have to be unanimous on what that unlawful thing was.
The jurors — a diverse cross-section of Manhattan residents and professional backgrounds — often appeared riveted by testimony in the trial, including from Cohen and Daniels. Many took notes and watched intently as witnesses answered questions from Manhattan prosecutors and Trump’s lawyers.
Jurors started deliberating after a marathon day of closing arguments in which a prosecutor spoke for more than five hours, underscoring the burden the district attorney's office faces in needing to establish Trump's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
A defense lawyer spoke for about half that time; the Trump team need not establish his innocence to avoid a conviction but must instead bank on at least one juror finding that prosecutors have not sufficiently proved their case.
Earlier Wednesday, the jury received instructions in the law from Merchan, who offered some guidance on factors the panel can use to assess witness testimony, including its plausibility, its consistency with other testimony, the witness’ manner on the stand and whether the person has a motive to lie.
But, the judge said, “there is no particular formula for evaluating the truthfulness and accuracy of another person’s statement.”
The principles he outlined are standard but perhaps all the more relevant after Trump’s defense leaned heavily on questioning the credibility of key prosecution witnesses, including Cohen.
Jurors asked to rehear testimony from Cohen and former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker about an August 2015 meeting with Trump at Trump Tower where the tabloid boss agreed to be the “eyes and ears” of his fledgling presidential campaign.
Pecker testified the plan included identifying potentially damaging stories about Trump so they could be squashed before being published. That, prosecutors say, was the beginning of the catch-and-kill scheme at the heart of the case.
Jurors also want to hear Pecker’s account of a phone call he said he received from Trump while he was an investor meeting in New Jersey. The publisher testified that Trump tracked him down and phoned him at the investor’s offices after hearing a rumor that another outlet had offered to buy former Playboy model Karen McDougal’s alleging that she had a yearlong affair with Trump in the mid-2000s.
Pecker testified that on the call, Trump told him, “Karen is a nice girl” and asked, “What do you think I should do?” Pecker said he replied: “I think you should buy the story and take it off the market.” He added that Trump told him he doesn’t buy stories because it always gets out and that Cohen would be in touch.
The publisher said he came away from the conversation thinking Trump was aware of the specifics of McDougal’s claims. Pecker said he believed the story was true and would have been embarrassing to Trump and his campaign if it were made public. The National Enquirer’s parent company, American Media Inc., eventually paid McDougal $150,000 for the rights to her story in an agreement that also included writing and other opportunities with its fitness and other publications.
The fourth item jurors requested is Pecker’s testimony about his decision in October 2016 to back out of an agreement to then sell the rights to McDougal’s story to Trump through a company Cohen had established for the transaction, known as an “assignment of rights.”
“I called Michael Cohen, and I said to him that the agreement, the assignment deal is off. I am not going forward. It is a bad idea, and I want you to rip up the agreement,” Pecker testified. “He was very, very, angry. Very upset. Screaming, basically, at me.”
Pecker testified that he reiterated to Cohen that he wasn’t going forward with the agreement and told him to, “Rip it up.”
“And he said, excuse me, Michael Cohen said, The Boss is going to be very angry at you,” Pecker testified.
Any verdict must be unanimous. During deliberations, six alternate jurors who also sat through every minute of the trial will be kept at the courthouse in a separate room in case they are needed to replace a juror who falls ill or is otherwise unavailable. If that happens, deliberations will start anew once the replacement juror is in place.
___
Follow the AP’s coverage of former President Donald Trump at https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump.
