Judge in Trump’s hush money trial did not bar campaign finance expert from testifying for defense

  • 📰 AP
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 69 sec. here
  • 3 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 31%
  • Publisher: 51%

Fact-Checking Berita

Indonesia Berita Terbaru,Indonesia Berita utama

As the trial continued Tuesday, social media users misrepresented Merchan’s ruling, repeating a statement Trump made that Smith, a law professor and former Republican member of the Federal Election Commission, was not being allowed to take the stand.

Former President Donald Trump speaks to the media after attending the day’s proceedings at his hush money trial, in New York, Monday, May 20, 2024. Social media users are falsely claiming that Judge Juan M. Merchan wouldn’t let Trump’s legal team call campaign finance expert Bradley A. Smith to testify. CLAIM: New York Judge Juan M. Merchan wouldn’t let the defense call campaign finance expert Bradley A.

AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. Merchan did not bar Smith from testifying. Trump’s legal team chose to not call on him after the judge on Monday declined to broaden the scope of questioning the defense could pursue. The ruling echoed his pretrial ruling on the matter., social media users misrepresented Merchan’s ruling, repeating a statement Trump made that Smith, a law professor and former Republican member of the Federal Election Commission, was not being allowed to take the stand.

“The expert witness that we have, the best there is in election law, Brad Smith, he’s considered the Rolls Royce, or we’ll bring it back to an American car, Cadillac, but the best there is,”The former president reiterated this falsehood several more times in his post-trial comments, claiming that Merchan was blocking Smith’s testimony “because he’s going to say we did nothing wrong.” He alsoA warrant for Netanyahu’s arrest was requested.

The judge said if Smith did testify, the prosecution would then be permitted to call an expert of its own, resulting in a “battle of the experts” that “would only serve to confuse and not assist the jury.”on Monday that he did not testify because of a decision made by the defense. He added that he had intended to testify about complicated background knowledge necessary to understanding the case, rather than about the law.

 

Terima kasih atas komentar Anda. Komentar Anda akan dipublikasikan setelah ditinjau.
Berita ini telah kami rangkum agar Anda dapat membacanya dengan cepat. Jika Anda tertarik dengan beritanya, Anda dapat membaca teks lengkapnya di sini. Baca lebih lajut:

 /  🏆 728. in İD

Indonesia Berita Terbaru, Indonesia Berita utama