Advertisement
Trending

Bragg Moves to Undercut Trump’s Access to Evidence Ahead of Trial

Advertisement

OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.


Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg (D) has filed a new motion to limit former President Donald Trump’s access to certain evidence that will be presented by his office in the case against him which is aimed at preventing Trump from obtaining unrestricted access to evidence.

Prosecutors from Bragg’s office have reportedly asked the judge in the case to limit Donald Trump’s ability to review the prosecution’s evidence against him without the presence of a lawyer, The New York Times reported.

The DA’s request filed on Tuesday is based on concerns that Trump could potentially use this information to further his political aspirations for the presidency in 2024. Bragg’s office argued that implementing such a restriction would prevent Trump from revealing confidential case details, the Times noted further.

According to Bragg’s office, imposing a restriction on Trump’s personal scrutiny of the prosecution’s evidence without a lawyer present would prevent him from disclosing specific details of the case as he seeks to run for president again in 2024, said the Times.

Advertisement

“When 34 felony charges were unsealed against Mr. Trump earlier this month, prosecutors working for the district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, said they were working with the former president’s lawyers to come to an agreement as to how some case material — personal information of witnesses and evidence, including grand jury testimony — could be used,” the Times reported.

“But the opposing sides could not reach an agreement, and the prosecution’s request is now expected to be opposed by Mr. Trump’s lawyers. Ultimately it will fall to the judge in the case, Juan M. Merchan, to determine whether to limit Mr. Trump’s access and public comments in any way,” the report continued.

The prosecution is not pursuing a gag order to preclude Trump from discussing the case entirely, as Justice Merchan has indicated he would not approve such an order at this stage, said the report. However, the prosecution’s appeal could restrict Trump’s capacity to exploit the evidence for political motives.

This motion, presented by Catherine McCaw, an assistant district attorney, marks an initial maneuver in what is projected to be a contentious and prolonged legal struggle between the two parties on numerous matters in the ensuing months, as the case advances toward a trial, the Times added.

Several legal experts have ripped Bragg for filing charges against Trump, the first ex-president to be charged with crimes in the nation’s history. They argue that Bragg’s case is exceedingly weak.

Also, Harvard Law School professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz told Fox News earlier this month that Bragg could face a prison sentence of up to five years if he is found guilty of leaking information regarding Trump’s indictment to the media.

In New York, leaking grand jury testimony to the public is considered a Class E felony and can result in a prison sentence ranging from one to five years.

Advertisement

He also spoke about Bragg using former Trump personal lawyer Michael Cohen as a witness in his case against the former president, who was indicted on Thursday and is scheduled to be arraigned and make his first court appearance on Tuesday.

“I don’t think an indictment can actually come forward now after the comments made by [Robert] Costello. He has proved that the main witness is going to be a perjuring liar on the witness stand, and that puts the district attorney in a terrible position,” Dershowitz said.

“If he uses Cohen as a witness, he could actually lose his bar license. It’s unethical to put a witness on the stand who you know is lying, and he has to know that Cohen will be lying. Or he tries the case without Cohen, which would be very difficult, or he does the right thing: he drops the case,” he added.

Others have criticized Bragg, a Democrat who ran for office on a pledge to ‘get Trump,’ has also brought what is nothing more than a politically motivated case against the former president, who declared in November he was running for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.

Back to top button