Defense Questions Stormy Daniels' Credibility in Trump's Hush Money Trial
Defense Questions Stormy Daniels' Credibility in Trump's Hush Money Trial
Share:

Stormy Daniels is set to take the witness stand again Thursday in Donald Trump's hush money trial, where the defense aims to cast doubt on the credibility of her sensational testimony regarding an alleged sexual encounter with the former president and the payment she received to remain silent. The trial against Trump resumes with defense attorneys challenging Daniels, whose testimony is crucial to the prosecution's case accusing Trump of illegally influencing the 2016 presidential campaign by suppressing negative stories about him.

Trump observed from the courtroom as Daniels recounted for hours on Tuesday an unexpected sexual encounter she claims occurred in 2006. Trump refutes any such encounter took place. Nevertheless, a decade later, Trump's then-lawyer, Michael Cohen, paid her to maintain silence during the final weeks of the presidential race.

Daniels' testimony marked a remarkable moment in what might be the lone criminal case against the presumed Republican presidential nominee to proceed to trial before voters make their decision in November regarding his return to the White House. Trump maintains his innocence, denies any misconduct, and portrays himself as a target of a politically motivated justice system striving to prevent his re-election.

Trump's legal team endeavors to portray Daniels as dishonest and opportunistic, alleging she seeks to bring down the former president after profiting from her story about him. Daniels staunchly defended herself at times against direct questioning, vehemently denying any attempt to extort Trump.

Throughout much of Daniels' account of their alleged sexual encounter, which she claims occurred after meeting Trump at a 2006 Lake Tahoe celebrity golf event sponsored by the adult film studio where she worked, Trump appeared displeased, shaking his head and scowling. At one point, the judge informed defense attorneys during a sidebar conversation, away from the jury and the public, that he could hear Trump "cursing audibly."

"I am addressing you here at the bench because I do not wish to embarrass him," Judge Juan M. Merchan told Trump's lawyers, according to a transcript of the proceedings.

In a first for the trial, the defense sought a mistrial on Tuesday citing Daniels' detailed testimony as "extremely prejudicial." However, the judge rejected the request, partially attributing the oversight to the defense's failure to object more vigorously during her testimony to prevent her from divulging excessive detail.

Trump faces 34 counts of falsifying internal Trump Organization business records. These charges relate to documents such as invoices and checks categorized as legal expenses in Trump Organization records, whereas prosecutors contend they mainly served as reimbursements to Cohen for the $130,000 hush money payment to Daniels.

Testimony thus far has indicated that at the time of the payment to Daniels, Trump and his campaign were grappling with the fallout from the October 2016 release of the previously unseen 2005 "Access Hollywood" tape in which he boasted about groping women without consent.

Prosecutors argue that the outcry over the "Access Hollywood" tape prompted Cohen to pay Daniels to prevent her from publicizing her claims, which could further damage Trump's standing with female voters.

Trump's legal team endeavors to demonstrate that Trump's actions aimed to safeguard his reputation and family, rather than his campaign, from embarrassing revelations about his personal life.

MrBeast's Birthday Bash: Win a Tesla in Instagram Giveaway Extravaganza!

Islamabad High Court Finds No Evidence Imran Khan Held Diplomatic Cipher

 

Join NewsTrack Whatsapp group
Related News