IANAL, but it doesn’t seem like this is a big deal. DOJ wanted to know if the defense was going to use a particular defense. The judge didn’t compel the defense to disclose their defensive strategy. Maybe a lawyer can provide some insight but this seems like a non story.
An Advice of Counsel defense is basically saying “I’m not responsible for my actions because my lawyer said it was legal for me to do.” If that’s the case, Attorney Client Privilege is waved and all communication between trump and his lawyers (that said “it was OK”, not the current lawyers) should be provided as evidence. Basically provide the evidence to support the AoC defense.
It’s basic discovery. trump is stalling for time, and cannon is helping. If trump goes with the AoC defense, day one of the trial is going to be him claiming AoC and the prosecutors asking for the relevant evidence to review which will stall the case because they’ll ‘need at least a month to get all the records together’ and then the prosecutors will need to review them, and I’m certain it will be the most unorganized mess handed off. Like shitty scans of faxes of the emails all off center and slightly rotated… So OCR will be a nightmare.
Same, IANAL, but of all the things I see wrong with this specific judge, particularly in being involved in any Trump and/or political case, considering the blatant bias shown in past cases that a non-partisan judge would not make, I don’t see, or get why this would be a particularly big deal.
I get knowing in advance what the defense will be arguing helps prepares, but I feel if something unexpected is argued, and requires more research, a request to continue the trial on another date should be submitted.
In this case, permitting such a delay would be to Trumps benefit, and it would be best to be prepared for any such strategy, and not need to submit any such delaying requests.
It’d be great for the DOJ if they could get the judge to disallow arguing distracting, time wasting, unrelated strategies, but this particular judge is such Trump groupie I doubt that would happen.
Won’t someone rid us of this meddlesome judge?
🤖 I’m a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
The judge overseeing Donald Trump’s federal classified documents case has refused Department of Justice (DOJ) special counsel Jack Smith’s request of a discloser regarding the former president’s “advice-of-counsel defense” during the trial, sparking criticism online.
Trump has pleaded not guilty to 40 charges relating to allegations he illegally retained top-secret and classified material after he left office in January 2021, then obstructed the federal attempt to retrieve them from his Mar-a-Lago resort residence in Florida.
On Friday, Judge Aileen Cannon, who was nominated to the bench by Trump, rejected Smith’s request without prejudice, to force the former president to reveal if he plans on using a defense that he was merely relying on advice of his lawyers during the trial.
In court filings, Cannon rejected federal prosecutors “motion to compel disclosure regarding advice-of-counsel defense,” while saying such a request is “not amenable to proper consideration at this juncture.”
Her refusal has since sparked backlash online as she faces criticism over her decisions on the case and is accused of failing to enforce a routine deadline, amid claims the former president is hoping to delay the trial until after the 2024 election.
The judge previously handed down a decision that meant that Trump would not have to testify under oath his unsubstantiated claim that the FBI may have “planted” evidence against him during its August 2022 raid at Mar-a-Lago.
Saved 67% of original text.
