05/31/2024
Most of you know that former President Donald Trump was convicted of 34 counts in an indictment in New York City.
After I'd done this, I realized that it is way long, but might be of benefit to some (any lawyers reading this can skip after #2). Everyone else can either read and comment or skip altogether.
Here is what I know for sure, based upon my experience in trying both criminal and civil cases before a jury:
1. Except for those who were physically present in the courtroom during the entirety of the trial proceedings, from jury selection to adjournment today, no one knows (a) the evidence that was presented, (b) the objections, if any, to any evidence, (c) the rulings by the Court on objections, (d) the closing arguments of counsel for the State and the Defendant, (e) motions made and argued before the jury was charged or thereafter and the arguments made regarding those motions, (f) the Judge's charge to the jury, (g) objections made by counsel for either party to charges and the Court's ruling on any such objections, (h) questions/request by the jury after they began deliberations, and (i) the Court's responses to any jury questions/requests.
2. What each of us not physically present "know" is what we have either read in news reports, heard in news reports, seen on news reports - a great deal of which is the "impression"/"opinion" of the person reporting. Bottom line, we don't know everything we need to know in order to make an intelligent and informed opinion on whether we find the verdict to be correct or incorrect, or a little bit of both.
Here is what I believe to be true, again based on my trial experience (New York could be slightly different, but not much - there is a Constitutional amendment regarding jury trials):
a. Both the State and the Defendant were represented by competent counsel, each of whom prepared diligently for the trial.
b. The jury "pool", from which the jury was "struck" was selected in strict accordance with New York law, i.e., probably by random selection by computer from a list compiled from voter registrations, driver licenses, tax rolls, etc. I don't know how many were in the "pool" but, with a case of this magnitude, I'd expect they started with between 100 and 200 folks, even after excuses for cause were granted by the Court.
c. The "voir dire" by counsel for each side was probing and extensive in an effort to uncover any bias or prejudice.
d. The 12 chosen to serve and the 6 alternates, were chosen by "striking", i.e., each side alternating, got to "strike" or "excuse" a potential juror from the "pool" until there were only 12 remaining, with the last 6 "struck" being designated as "alternates", in case one of the original 12 was unable to continue, i.e., sickness, death, etc.
e. Once the jury and alternates were chosen, they were administered an oath to base their decision on only the evidence and the law as charged by the Court.
f. Then the case started, usually with cautionary instructions from the Court. Then each side gave its opening statement (not evidence). The trial then began in earnest with the State presenting its evidence (documents and testimony) with any objections by the Defendant and Court rulings on the objections. Ultimately, the State rested. The defense then made motions, i.e. dismiss for lack of evidence, etc. and the Court either denied or reserved ruling. Then the defense presented its evidence with same deal regarding objections by the State and rulings on those. Then the defense rested. The State could have presented "rebuttal" evidence or not.
g. Both the State and the Defense presented the Court with requested jury charges (could have been required earlier by Court). Likely the Court and counsel for State and Defense had a "pre-charge" conference where the Court would here arguments regarding requested charges.
h. The Court would charge the jury regarding both the law and their obligation to determine what the true facts are, only from the admitted evidence, and apply those facts to the law as instructed by the Court.
i. Jury is excused while both counsel make objections to the charge and the Court either overrules or grants, either in whole or in part. If no change in charge (hardly ever is), the case is submitted to the jury along with all physical evidence (apparently, in this case, they also got a transcript of testimony and some audio).
j. Jury deliberates with only the 12 - no one else with them.
k. If jury has questions or requests, those are given to Judge, who shares them with counsel. The Judge decides how to answer or respond.
l. Jury continues to deliberate. Once they are in complete agreement, the foreperson notifies the Court that they have reached a verdict.
m. All parties, counsel, jury, Judge are then assembled in the courtroom. The Judge asks the foreperson if the jury has reached a verdict. The answer is in the affirmative and the written verdict form is provided to the Judge who reviews to make sure it is in proper form. It then goes back to the foreperson. The Judge asks the defendant to stand. The Judge then asks how the jury found on each count of the indictment to which the foreperson responds.
n. The jury is dismissed, unless they are "polled" (a usual procedure), i.e., each is asked individually whether that is their verdict. If all say yes, then the verdict stands.
o. Jury is dismissed with thanks. Counsel for both sides make whatever motions they want, i.e., if convicted, defense moves for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and states grounds - that generally never gets granted. Probably discussion regarding bond vs incaration pending sententing - either defendant goes into custody or is released on bond.
After a trial, if defendant is convicted, defense counsel will (within a specified time frame) file motions - to set aside for one reason or the other, for various other reasons. Those will either be ruled upon immediately or set for hearing. If a motion to set aside the verdict is not granted by the Court, the defendant has a limited time to appeal.
APPEAL: An appeal is to a "higher" Court (I believe in New York it is called the Court of Appeals). That Court (more than one Justice) reviews a written transcript of the evidence, any physical evidence, the charge of the Court - all as pointed out and briefed by the defense. Usually the State is represented, not by the prosecuting counsel, but by the state Attorney General. IMPORTANT: NO ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IS PRESENTED ON THE APPEAL - IT IS A REVIEW AND NOT A "RETRIAL". It has been my experience that an appeal, after all post-trial motions are ruled on, generally takes about 6 months to 1 1/2 years to be decided. Also my experience that criminal appeals have about a 5% or less probability of success.
Finally, my opinion regarding the "fairness" of the trial:
Again, since I wasn't there, I can only base this on what I've read, heard or seen.
Assuming that the appropriate New York process was followed in the trial, including the selection of the jury "pool", the rulings on evidence, the Court's charges to the jury, etc., I believe this to be a fair trial as long established in the justice system dating back even prior to this nation's founding - a citizen being judged by a jury of folks fairly chosen from the place where the alleged crime occurred. This process is the bedrock of our United States criminal process.
