In a legal drama that’s as convoluted as it is sensational, the jury in former President Donald Trump’s hush money case has been handed instructions so contentious they’ve left legal minds reeling. With accusations flying and political tensions at an all-time high, Judge Juan Merchan’s guidance to the jury has become the latest flashpoint.
Former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy didn’t mince words when he lambasted the instructions during a Fox News appearance. He slammed them as inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution, describing them as a “make-it-up-as-you-go-along” situation. “What’s supposed to happen in a criminal trial is a prosecutor has to prove every element of an offense beyond a reasonable doubt,” McCarthy emphasized. But according to him, this trial has veered far off that constitutional path.
Here’s the kicker: the jury doesn’t even have to agree on what exactly Trump did or what crime he was trying to commit or hide. Judge Merchan supposedly told them they could pick from a menu of criminal objectives and didn’t need to be unanimous. McCarthy found this not just outrageous but borderline surreal, suggesting it’s one of the many bizarre turns in this high-stakes case.
Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, weighed in, branding the instructions as the “coup de grace.” He noted that the jury could disagree on which crime Trump committed out of three possible choices and still deliver a unanimous verdict. Imagine that—a potential split decision treated as a consensus!
"You can all disagree on if the crime was committed so long as you agree trump committed any crime, lock him up" https://t.co/mkMpJj5pXn
— Tim Pool (@Timcast) May 29, 2024
Turley broke down the options given to the jury: federal election violations, falsifying other documents, and violating tax laws. The redundancy here is staggering. It’s like saying you can be guilty of falsifying documents twice for the same act—once under general New York election law and again for influencing the election by falsifying documents. If that doesn’t give you vertigo, nothing will.
Turley pointed out that dead misdemeanors were resurrected into felonies through some legal acrobatics, turning a mundane bookkeeping error into a potential life sentence scenario. This isn’t your average courtroom drama; it’s a legal circus with more twists than a daytime soap opera.
…This judge has stated that he wants to stay close to the standard instructions. The problem is that this case is anything but standard. We will be looking for some of the outstanding issues, particularly on the standard of proof for key elements like "unlawful means." …
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 29, 2024
……Merchan is telling them that they can only consider Cohen's plea to a federal election violation was only allowed to judge his credibility and offer "context." That is mere meek after the prosecutors said repeatedly that such violations were committed as an indisputable…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 29, 2024
……Judge Merchan just said that if they find that any witness has testified with regard to any material fact, they can disregard the entirety of his or her testimony. It could be called the Michael Cohen charge. It seems clear to some of us that Cohen clearly lied about the…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 29, 2024
…Merchan has instructed that the first count of falsifying business records in the first degree must show that Trump made or causes a false entry to be made. Intent means conscious or purpose to defraud. Intent does not require an intent to defraud any particular person or…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 29, 2024
So, what does this mean for Trump? Well, if convicted, he’s bound to appeal, armed with these controversial jury instructions as his primary weapon. The legal experts are already calling foul, and you can bet this saga is far from over. The jury has been dismissed after their first day of deliberations without a verdict, leaving everyone on edge.