Legal experts express concerns over Stormy Daniels' testimony, suggesting it may have damaged the prosecution's case against former President Trump.
Legal experts have raised questions regarding the credibility of Stormy Daniels' testimony in the New York v. Trump case, following her appearance on Tuesday. Daniels' detailed account of an alleged sexual encounter with former President Donald Trump has drawn criticism for its excessive detail and potentially prejudicial nature.
MSNBC legal analyst Danny Cevallos has criticized Daniels for turning the trial into "a quasi-sex assault case," an approach that Cevallos believes has given Trump's legal team an opening for appeal. Additionally, Cevallos noted that Daniels' tendency to "add her own editorial" could have unnecessarily exposed the prosecution to risks.
Cevallos argued that the core purpose of Daniels' testimony could have been achieved by simply stating "we had sex," rendering the additional details superfluous and potentially damaging. Daniels' comment that she "hated" Trump has also been cited as detrimental to the prosecution's case.
MSNBC legal analyst Elliot Williams expressed concerns that Daniels' excessive testimony may have weakened the prosecution's position by providing ammunition for the Trump team's closing statements.
CNN legal analyst Elie Honig has questioned Daniels' credibility based on her responses under cross-examination by Trump's team. Honig pointed to Daniels' admission of hating Trump and her public expressions of hostility toward him as undermining her credibility as a witness.
Daniels' social media posts, in which she has fantasized about Trump being in jail, have further raised concerns regarding her bias. "The View" co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin, a former Trump aide, also questioned Daniels' credibility, suggesting that she could have provided a concise and less salacious account of the alleged encounter.
Griffin believes that Daniels' credibility was compromised by her overly detailed testimony, despite her personal belief in the truthfulness of Daniels' story. Other co-hosts of "The View," however, expressed their belief in Daniels' credibility, arguing that jurors may have found her to be persuasive.
The Washington Post has highlighted the potential for Daniels' testimony to be deemed prejudicial for the jury due to her descriptions of the encounter as not fully consensual. This could provide the Trump team with grounds for appeal.
Daniels has denied allegations of forced intercourse, but her testimony has suggested a power imbalance and emotional distress following the encounter. Trump has pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records related to the alleged payments to Daniels.
