Quote:

---

The prosecution and defense are discussing a definition involving legitimate press function, a broad concept of normal tasks such as solicitation letters or seeking new subscribers to a publication.
In this case, it's about AMI, the publisher of the National Enquirer.
Trump's attorney Emil Bove argues that the defense wants to make clear that AMI did publish articles and do things for Karen McDougal, pursuant to the agreement within normal legitimate press function.
Judge Juan Merchan says:
"Why can't we just strike the phrase legitimate press function is a broad concept. I can keep what you have before that and what you have after that."
Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo says he thinks some of the other language is "unnecessary."
Merchan says there's no harm in including the line.

---

Quote:

---

Judge Juan Merchan is now discussing another language dispute that appears to be related to Michael Cohen's crimes.
The defense wants a sentence in the jury instructions to read "participated in a crime."
The prosecution wants "participated in and was convicted of two crimes."
Merchan agrees with the defense to tweak it to say "participated in crimes" (plural) and remove the language about being convicted.
They also are debating including "accomplice" versus "culprit" in the sentence.
"You should know going forward for the rest of this conference and beyond where there is standard pattern jury instructions I don't deviate," Merchan said.

---

Quote:

---

Judge Juan Merchan is now reviewing some instructions jointly submitted by the parties earlier today.
In a moment of levity he says the word "eleemosynary" can be struck from definitions they proposed reading to the jury.
Merchan joked that he tried to pronounce it several times but cannot and so spelled it for the court reporter. He also said it means "charitable." Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo laughing said they're fine with that.

---

Quote:

---

Proceedings Senior Court Reporter Lisa Kramsky, 4276

1 MR. BLANCHE: Your Honor, we don't have to do this
2 now, but at the conclusion of the People's case, at sidebar
3 we said that we were going to move for a Trial Order of
4 Dismissal.
5 I do not have to do that now --
6 THE COURT: We can do it now. That's fine.
7 MR. BLANCHE: Thank you, your Honor.
8 Your Honor, for several reasons we believe that the
9 Court should enter a Trial Order of Dismissal now.
10 First, there is absolutely no evidence that the
11 filings were false.
12 The business records were not false.
13 There is no dispute that Mr. Cohen provided legal
14 services to President Trump in 2017.
15 Not only did Mr. Cohen admit that, but Miss
16 Tarasoff when she booked the records that are part of at
17 least 12 of the counts said the same thing.
18 When they were entered in the Trump system, they
19 were entered as legal expenses for Retainer Agreement.
20 There is no dispute that during 2017, that's
21 exactly what Mr. Cohen was doing for President Trump.
22 Now, not only that, but when the invoices were sent
23 to The Trump Organization, there is no evidence that those
24 were mishandled and entered falsely.
25 So when the invoices are sent, President Trump is

1 not in New York, he's in the White House, and the invoices
2 come in for services rendered.
3 And Mr. Cohen testified that he was rendering
4 services for President Trump during that time, as his
5 Personal Attorney.
6 So, at the start, there is absolutely no false
7 business filing.
8 They are accurate business filings.

---

Quote:

---

Donald Trump's team wants the judge to read an expanded jury instruction on intent and also an instruction on intent to defraud.
Judge Juan Merchan asks why they need the "intent to defraud" charge in addition to the intent charge.
Trump attorney Emil Bove argues there's a "significant issue with instructing to the jury that intent to defraud could include defrauding the government and the voting public, based on the facts of this case."
Merchan says prosecutors have to prove there was "intent to deprive another, they don't have to prove that it's property or money, they have to prove that it was something."

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Judge Juan Merchan says falsifying business records in the first degree "requires that there be an intent to defraud that includes the intent to commit another crime."
Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo says the other crime is the election law violation that is created through the alleged conspiracy.
But the prosecutor says the object crime doesn't need to be completed. There just needs to be intent to commit the underlying crime.

---

But there is no evidence of intent.

---

Quote:

---

Now there's a discussion about how they will instruct the jury on how a person causes a false entry in business records and what that means.
Trump attorney Emil Bove objected to prosecutors' language, saying they want to strike the phrase "a person causes a false entry when…"
Bove argues:

Quote:

---

"They could convict based on someone else causing a false entry and accessorial liability basically causing the causer where (for example, if) Allen Weisselberg caused someone to do something and then President Trump caused Allen Weisselberg. It doubles up on accessorial liability."

---

Judge Juan Merchan agrees with the defense but then hears prosecutor Matthew Colangelo.
Colangelo says it is "an extremely important concept" because Trump's lawyers argued in openings that Trump did not deal directly with the business records. Colangelo says Trump could have acted in concert with Weisselberg to cause the false entry.
Merchan responds, "Isn't this already covered in the definition of accomplice liability?"
Merchan is reserving decision but says his inclination is to strike the line as Trump's team requested.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Donald Trump's team wants the judge to read an expanded jury instruction on intent and also an instruction on intent to defraud.
Judge Juan Merchan asks why they need the "intent to defraud" charge in addition to the intent charge.
Trump attorney Emil Bove argues there's a "significant issue with instructing to the jury that intent to defraud could include defrauding the government and the voting public, based on the facts of this case."
Merchan says prosecutors have to prove there was "intent to deprive another, they don't have to prove that it's property or money, they have to prove that it was something."

---

---

Quote:

---

Judge Juan Merchan is addressing language related to intent to conceal or commit another crime.
Trump attorney Emil Bove is objecting to language proposed by prosecutors that he says calls the jury's attention to things that the government does not have to prove.
"What we perceive here is a risk of burden-shifting," Bove says.

---

Quote:

---

Judge Juan Merchan is now moving onto the final issue in the section, which he says he has particular concerns about. The section reads that the defendant did so with the intent to defraud that included an intent to commit or conceal another crime.
Merchan says that the defense proposes an additional line: Thus, for this second element the people must establish beyond a reasonable doubt two separate intents, the intent to defraud and the intent to commit or conceal the aid of another crime.
The judge says he's specifically concerned about this section. Defense attorney Emil Bove said he understands that their proposed language is not the official criminal jury instructions.
Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo argued the defense version is inconsistent with the text of the statute and "there's nothing in the statute about two separate intents."
Merchan said he'd keep the standard language on the issue.

---

Quote:

---

They're moving onto another submission that Judge Juan Merchan says he received at 1:05 p.m. today from both parties.
As they debate the law and the language to use to instruct the jury, the lawyers are often referencing "yellow" and "blue" edits on the document.
When they disagree, each side can use a color to propose disputed language that is then submitted to the judge to hash out at this conference.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

The judge says he's specifically concerned about this section. Defense attorney Emil Bove said he understands that their proposed language is not the official criminal jury instructions.
Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo argued the defense version is inconsistent with the text of the statute and "there's nothing in the statute about two separate intents."
Merchan said he'd keep the standard language on the issue.

---

---

Quote:

---

Trump's attorney Emil Bove says the defense doesn't think the underlying tax crime predicate should go to the jury.
But if it does, it should include language that says the jury must find prosecutors proved Donald Trump acted willfully with the intent to conceal a tax crime.
Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo says the alleged grossing-up agreement and intent to conceal the reimbursement to Michael Cohen that was income clearly goes to that underlying tax crime.

---

Alan Dershowitz reacts after visiting Trump trial and he can’t believe it- the judge went berserk pic.twitter.com/eOpmjrMZGh

— Karli Bonne’ 🇺🇸 (@KarluskaP) May 21, 2024

Quote:

---

The parties are debating over language about the jury's requirement to find the prosecutors proved that Donald Trump participated in the alleged conspiracy.
Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo said that there's "extensive corroboration" for example that Trump was at the Trump Tower 2015 meeting with David Pecker that goes to his participation in the conspiracy.
Trump attorney Emil Bove says, "Our perspective, what was discussed in that meeting if you credit the people's witnesses were a series of pretty standard campaign activities that were not criminal and were being practiced by candidates across the country for decades."
Bove continued, "the defense's position is there's nothing criminal at all" about what was discussed at that meeting.
Judge Juan Merchan asked, "If there's nothing criminal about it what difference does it make if he's present or not?"
Colangelo pushed back on this, in a preview of what's to come at closing arguments next week. He said that Bove's argument that the 2015 meeting was "benign" and a "high-minded" discussion about democracy did not match the trial record, pointing to evidence that Pecker told just a few people about the meeting and told them to keep it secret, and then "proceeded to do all the steps of the conspiracy" that prosecutors argue was unlawful.
Remember: Trump was first indicted in March 2023 by the Manhattan district attorney on state charges related to a hush-money payment to an adult film star in 2016. Prosecutors allege Trump was a part of an illegal conspiracy to undermine the integrity of the 2016 election. Further, they allege he was part of an unlawful plan to suppress negative information, including the $130,000 payment. Trump has pleaded not guilty.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo says the alleged grossing-up agreement and intent to conceal the reimbursement to Michael Cohen that was income clearly goes to that underlying tax crime.

---

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo said that there's "extensive corroboration" for example that Trump was at the Trump Tower 2015 meeting with David Pecker that goes to his participation in the conspiracy.

---

---

Aggie Apotheosis said:

---

Just catching up now. Trump said that "absolutely" he would testify but he didn't. Do we know why?

---

TheRatt87 said:

---

Aggie Apotheosis said:

---

Just catching up now. Trump said that "absolutely" he would testify but he didn't. Do we know why?

---

Because the only testimony tying you to the crime you are charged with comes from a self-admitted serial perjurer, who also admitted on the stand at this trial to committing grand larceny by stealing tens of thousands of dollars from you.

---

Quote:

---

Arguing for another deviation from the standard criminal jury instructions language, defense attorney Emil Bove asked that Judge Juan Merchan be as specific as possible when describing the statutes as they are applied in this case, noting the importance of the case and that there's not much of a precedent for the way the statutes are being used in this case.

Merchan said he understands what Bove is saying about the importance of the case but said, "What you're asking me to do is change the law and I'm not going to do that."
Trump shook his head as Merchan said this.

---

Quote:

---

The court is taking a break.
Judge Juan Merchan and lawyers for the prosecution and defense have been hashing out instructions on the law that the judge will eventually read to the jury as he charges them to begin deliberations, which could start next week.
The jury is not present for these proceedings. The defense rested its case Tuesday morning, just one day after the prosecution rested its case.
It's unclear how long the charging conference will last.

---

bobbranco said:

---

Whoa!

Judge to Costello & Bove with jury and press out of courtroom.

Quote:

---

If you try to stare me down one more time, I will remove you from the stand.

I will strike his entire testimony; do you understand me?

---

---

RogerFurlong said:

---

What happens if they convict him then he gets jail time? Does he get arrested before the appeal process. That could be real bad for the country. I wouldn't want to be a guard at Rikers if that's the case.

---

Quote:

---

The defense and prosecution have moved onto an instruction about tax law.
Defense attorney Emil Bove again reiterates that tax crimes should not be permitted to go to the jury as one of the underlying crimes Trump sought to conceal when he falsified business records.

He goes on to quote Michael Cohen's testimony when asked about Allen Weisselberg's "grossing up" of the money he was paid. Cohen said, "I didn't really even think of that I just wanted to get my money back." Bove said that prosecutors are trying to say Cohen was trying to intentionally evade taxes by disguising the reimbursement as income and gross it up to cover his tax obligations.

Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo argues that the language on tax crimes should be read to the jury because the money that was paid to Cohen was grossed up for tax purposes, which was written on notes from Weisselberg and Jeffrey McConney in evidence.

Colangelo notes that they were falsely identified corporate payments rather than reimbursements and they were then submitted to the Internal Revenue Service as income through 1099s.

Defense attorney Bove says, "An agreement after the election to do these things is not an agreement to promote Trump's candidacy in the 2016 election."

Bove now argues they weren't allowed to ask Cohen about his own tax handling of the money and that there's no evidence of Trump or Trump Organization's tax handling of the payments.

---

PA24 said:

---

RogerFurlong said:

---

What happens if they convict him then he gets jail time? Does he get arrested before the appeal process. That could be real bad for the country. I wouldn't want to be a guard at Rikers if that's the case.

---

My guess is 6 month house arrest which takes him off the campaign trail.

The jury pool is anti trump, IMO, he will be convicted and Biden will remind the world that Donald J. Trump is a felon.

---

Quote:

---

Judge Juan Merchan says he's gone over the issues he wanted to review and now he's asking the two sides if they have anything else they want to raise.

Trump attorney Emil Bove raises an instruction related to bias and Trump that he says was modified from the Trump Org. trial.

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass says its not necessary in this case because it was rooted out in voir dire. This was the portion earlier in the trial when the judge and the attorneys questioned potential jurors about their backgrounds and beliefs to determine whether they can be fair and impartial jurors.

Steinglass also argues that the point of the instruction in the Trump Org. trial was to remind the jury that Trump was not a party to the case.

The judge says he doesn't normally give this instruction but that he will include the government's modified version.

Merchan says he will have an instruction on bias while also saying the questionnaire had 42 or 43 questions and the voir dire was pretty extensive.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

The defense and prosecution have moved onto an instruction about tax law.
Defense attorney Emil Bove again reiterates that tax crimes should not be permitted to go to the jury as one of the underlying crimes Trump sought to conceal when he falsified business records.

He goes on to quote Michael Cohen's testimony when asked about Allen Weisselberg's "grossing up" of the money he was paid. Cohen said, "I didn't really even think of that I just wanted to get my money back." Bove said that prosecutors are trying to say Cohen was trying to intentionally evade taxes by disguising the reimbursement as income and gross it up to cover his tax obligations.

Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo argues that the language on tax crimes should be read to the jury because the money that was paid to Cohen was grossed up for tax purposes, which was written on notes from Weisselberg and Jeffrey McConney in evidence.

Colangelo notes that they were falsely identified corporate payments rather than reimbursements and they were then submitted to the Internal Revenue Service as income through 1099s.

Defense attorney Bove says, "An agreement after the election to do these things is not an agreement to promote Trump's candidacy in the 2016 election."

Bove now argues they weren't allowed to ask Cohen about his own tax handling of the money and that there's no evidence of Trump or Trump Organization's tax handling of the payments.

---

---

Quote:

---

I don't follow how any ot this helps anyone avoid paying income tax.

"Bove said that prosecutors are trying to say Cohen was trying to intentionally evade taxes by disguising the reimbursement as income and gross it up to cover his tax obligations."

I don't understand how this helps Cohen evade paying taxes.

---

Quote:

---

Defense attorney Emil Bove argued that he wanted the judge to instruct the jury that hush money is not illegal.

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass opposed Bove's request and went on to say the defense was asking the judge to make their legal arguments for them.

Shortly after, Judge Juan Merchan weighed in and said he would not include it because it came out several times in testimony that hush money is not illegal.

Merchan said that he suspects the defense will make that argument during summations and the prosecution won't dispute that. He said giving an instruction to that effect is taking it too far.

Quote:

---

"I think that to take it to the next level and actually give an instruction to the bench is taking it too far. I don't think it's necessary," Merchan said.

---

---

PA24 said:

---

RogerFurlong said:

---

What happens if they convict him then he gets jail time? Does he get arrested before the appeal process. That could be real bad for the country. I wouldn't want to be a guard at Rikers if that's the case.

---

My guess is 6 month house arrest which takes him off the campaign trail.

The jury pool is anti trump, IMO, he will be convicted and Biden will remind the world that Donald J. Trump is a felon.

---

Rockdoc said:

---

PA24 said:

---

RogerFurlong said:

---

What happens if they convict him then he gets jail time? Does he get arrested before the appeal process. That could be real bad for the country. I wouldn't want to be a guard at Rikers if that's the case.

---

My guess is 6 month house arrest which takes him off the campaign trail.

The jury pool is anti trump, IMO, he will be convicted and Biden will remind the world that Donald J. Trump is a felon.

---

Why would he serve anything if waiting on appeal?

---