Trump's Lawyers Seek to Overturn Conviction in Hush-Money Case, Citing Tainted Evidence

https://icaro.icaromediagroup.com/system/images/photos/16290931/original/open-uri20240712-18-pbalvg?1720808975
ICARO Media Group
Politics
12/07/2024 18h26

In a recent development, lawyers representing former President Donald Trump are urging a judge in New York to overturn his conviction and dismiss the hush-money case against him. They argue that certain evidence presented during the trial was "tainted" and should not have been allowed, based on the Supreme Court's recent ruling on presidential immunity.

According to the New York Post, among the disputed evidence is a conversation between Trump and then-Communications Director Hope Hicks. In this conversation, Trump allegedly suggests that it would be preferable for the story of his alleged affair with porn star Stormy Daniels to emerge after the 2016 election.

In a court filing dated July 10 but released on Thursday, lawyers Todd Blanche and Emil Bove asserted that the admission of this evidence represented a "structural error" under the federal Constitution. They argued that the verdicts reached by the jury must be vacated as a result.

The lawyers highlighted the Supreme Court's July 1 decision, which established that presidents have immunity from prosecution for certain official acts. However, the specific definition of these "official acts" was left open for interpretation by lower courts. The defense team contends that in light of this ruling, Trump's guilty verdict cannot be upheld.

Judge Juan Merchan has already granted a delay in the sentencing, pushing it from July to September. Meanwhile, a spokesperson for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office declined to comment on the matter when approached by The Guardian.

The prosecution now has until July 24 to respond to the latest legal maneuver by Trump's legal team, who are seeking to have their client's conviction overturned based on the alleged inclusion of "tainted" evidence.

The outcome of this case remains uncertain, as it will ultimately depend on the judge's interpretation of the evidence presented and the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity. As the legal battle continues, the hush-money case and its implications for the former president are set to remain in the spotlight.

The views expressed in this article do not reflect the opinion of ICARO, or any of its affiliates.

Related