Trump gets delay to hush money case sentencing till after election
Source: X / MSNBC
A New York judge has delayed former US President Donald Trump’s sentencing in his hush money criminal case until after the November 5 election, writing that he wants to avoid the unwarranted perception of a political motive.
Trump, the Republican nominee for president, had previously been scheduled to be sentenced on September 18.
His lawyers in August asked Justice Juan Merchan to push back his sentencing date until after the vote, citing “naked election-interference objectives.” Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who brought the charges against Trump, is a Democrat.
Merchan said on Friday he now planned to sentence Trump on November 26, unless the case is dismissed before then.
“The imposition of sentence will be adjourned to avoid any appearance – however unwarranted – that the proceeding has been affected by or seeks to affect the approaching presidential election in which the defendant is a candidate,” the judge wrote.
“The court is a fair, impartial and apolitical institution.”
Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung said after the ruling that the case should be dismissed altogether.
“There should be no sentencing in the Manhattan DA’s Election Interference Witch Hunt,” Cheung said in a statement.
Trump’s lawyers also argued there would not be enough time before the sentencing for the defence to potentially appeal Merchan’s forthcoming ruling on Trump’s request to overturn the conviction due to the US Supreme Court’s landmark decision on presidential immunity.
Merchan had been scheduled to rule on that motion on September 16. He wrote on Friday he now plans to rule on that motion on November 12.
In the first-ever criminal trial of a former or current US president, Trump was convicted on May 30 of falsifying business records to cover up his then-lawyer’s $US130,000 ($A192,931) payment to porn star Stormy Daniels for her silence before the 2016 election about a sexual encounter she says she had with Trump a decade earlier.
Trump denies the encounter and has vowed to appeal the verdict once he is sentenced.
The Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling, which related to a separate criminal case Trump faces, found that presidents cannot be criminally prosecuted for their official acts, and that evidence of presidents’ official actions cannot be used to help prove criminal cases involving unofficial actions.
Prosecutors with Bragg’s office argued their case involved Trump’s personal conduct, not official acts, so there was no reason to overturn the verdict.
But they took no position on Trump’s request to delay sentencing, saying in an August 16 filing they deferred to Merchan on the question.
The prosecutors said an appellate court could delay the sentencing anyway to give itself time to consider Trump’s arguments, a move they said would be “disruptive.”
Bragg’s team also said Trump’s court appearances required significant security and logistical planning and said there was a risk preparations could be made for his sentencing only to be called off.
Trump’s six-week trial brought a heavy police presence to lower Manhattan.
Falsifying business records is punishable by up to four years in prison, though punishments such as fines or probation are more common for others convicted of that crime in the past.
If Trump wins the White House, he could potentially order the Department of Justice to drop federal election interference charges against him.
He would not have the authority to end the New York state case or an election interference case in Georgia.
Trump’s lawyer says sex conviction evidence tainted
In another case, Trump’s lawyer has asked a federal appeals court to overturn a $7.4 million jury verdict finding him liable for sexually assaulting and defaming the writer E Jean Carroll, who accused him of raping her nearly three decades ago.
Much of the oral arguments before the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan on Friday turned on a claim by Trump’s lawyer that the trial judge should not have let other women testify that the Republican presidential nominee sexually mistreated them decades ago.
Wearing a blue suit and red tie, Trump showed little emotion during the arguments, but shook his head when Carroll’s lawyer Roberta Kaplan accused him of a pattern of “chatting up” women before he “pounced” on them.
The panel of three judges, all appointed to the bench by Democratic presidents, did not say when it would rule.
Trump is appealing a May 2023 civil verdict stemming from his alleged mid-1990s encounter with Carroll in a Bergdorf Goodman department store dressing room in Manhattan, and an October 2022 Truth Social post where he called Carroll’s claim a hoax.
Jurors awarded the former Elle magazine advice columnist a respective $US2.02 million ($3 million) and $US2.98 million ($4.42 million) for her sexual assault and defamation claims.
A different jury ordered Trump in January to pay Carroll $US83.3 million ($123.6 million) for having defamed her and damaging her reputation in June 2019 after she first accused him of rape.
In both denials, Trump said he didn’t know Carroll, that she was “not my type,” and that she made up her story to promote her memoir.
Both trials were overseen by US District Judge Lewis Kaplan, who is not related to Roberta Kaplan. Trump is separately appealing the $US83.3 million ($123.6 million) verdict.
Carroll also attended Friday’s arguments, wearing a dark blazer and suit with a navy blue hair ribbon. She and her lawyers did not talk with reporters after arguments ended.
Trump criticised Judge’s Kaplan’s admission of testimony from two accusers, Jessica Leeds and Natasha Stoynoff.
Leeds said Trump groped her on a plane in the late 1970s, while Stoynoff said he forcibly kissed her at his Mar-a-Lago estate in 2005.
John Sauer, a lawyer for Trump, called the case “a textbook example of implausible allegations being propped up by highly inflammatory, inadmissible propensity evidence.”
He also called the case “a quintessential he said, she said case” brought by a woman with a political motive to hurt Trump – Carroll is a Democrat – and funded by Trump’s enemies.
Circuit Judge Denny Chin cautioned, however, that “it’s very hard to overturn a jury verdict based on evidentiary rulings.”
Sauer also objected to Judge Kaplan’s letting jurors see a 2005 Access Hollywood video where Trump graphically described how famous people like himself could have sexual relations with beautiful women.
Carroll’s lawyer Kaplan said Trump had a habit of allowing “pleasant chatting” with women to spiral out of control, and then strongly denying their accusations he did anything wrong.
Circuit Judge Susan Carney asked her for assurance that the jury wasn’t unduly affected by Leeds’ testimony, if her accusations proved “too remote (and) too unlike the circumstances that your client alleged.”
Kaplan said she could. “I was going through the evidence at trial,” she said. “It was incredibly powerful.”
Though the first jury stopped short of finding that Trump raped Carroll, Judge Kaplan said its verdict made Trump’s June 2019 denial defamatory, leading to the $US83.3 million ($123.6 million) verdict.