Trump spokesperson Alina Habba expresses doubts about the impartiality of jury instructions, voicing concerns about biased instructions favoring the prosecution.
Alina Habba, spokesperson for former President Donald Trump, has raised concerns over the potential bias in jury instructions in the ongoing New York trial against Trump. Habba expressed doubts about the fairness of the instructions, particularly in light of the judge's perceived favoritism towards the prosecution throughout the proceedings.
In an interview on Fox News, Habba stated that she has "zero confidence" that Judge Juan Merchan will provide jury instructions "in an appropriate manner." She believes that the judge may deliver instructions that are slanted in favor of the prosecution, potentially swaying the jury's decision.
Jury instructions play a crucial role in guiding jurors through the relevant laws and facts of the case. Judges typically provide these instructions before deliberations begin, outlining the legal principles and definitions that the jury must consider in reaching a verdict.
Habba's concerns echo those of other legal experts, including Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz and former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama, Jay Town. They have argued that Judge Merchan has exhibited visible favoritism towards the prosecution, which may manifest in biased jury instructions.
The prosecution in this case seeks to prove that Trump offered or discussed offering money to adult film star Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal to keep their alleged affairs with Trump a secret prior to the 2016 presidential election. Trump has denied the affairs and pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records.
Habba maintains that the case lacks merit, as no criminal offense has been directly identified and the statute of limitations has passed. She worries that the judge, with perceived political motivations, will provide instructions that could lead the jury to convict Trump for political reasons.
Furthermore, Habba expressed concern about the time gap between closing arguments and jury deliberations. She believes that during this interval, jurors could be exposed to biased news coverage or influenced by family and friends with opinions on the case. This could potentially sway their judgment and lead to an unfair verdict.
Habba also suggested that jurors should have been sequestered to avoid any potential external influences. She argued that being left out in the open, where they could be exposed to media coverage and opinions, could compromise their ability to reach an impartial decision.
As the trial reaches its closing stages, Alina Habba's concerns about jury instructions and potential bias raise questions about the fairness and impartiality of the proceedings. The jury's ultimate verdict will be closely scrutinized, with implications for both Trump's future and the integrity of the American justice system.
