NEW YORK — The jury in the criminal hush money trial of Donald Trump faces the difficult task of deciding a former president’s guilt or innocence without the help of paper copies of instructions the judge gave.
A significant portion of the 55-page instructions were reread for the 12 jurors on the second day of their deliberations over the verdict. While the public can access the written guidelines at any time, jurors are not allowed to check these complicated instructions unless they agree to ask Judge Juan Merchan to read them aloud.
In short, New York law generally does not allow jurors to look freely back at the instructions, even though they are often extensive and likely difficult to commit to memory. The prohibition against providing copies of the instructions stems from a 1987 decision by the New York Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court, in People v. Owens, which involved a criminal drug sale.
The appeals court found that “the distribution of written instructions to the jury is not expressly authorized by law, and error in such submissions cannot be deemed harmless,” implying that giving the instructions would result in a conviction being overturned.
New York attorney Alton Harmon told the Washington Examiner that New York state court precedent regarding instructions contrasts with federal courts and other state court systems, “where they also provide the instructions, or at the very least give the judge the discretion to provide them.”
However, Harmon said numerous members of the New York State Bar “are advocating the move from this antiquated rule and are also hoping NYS courts move into the modern area by providing electronic transcripts that can be reviewed by the jury with greater ease.”
Because it is logical that physically having the instructions might help the jury reach its decision, many critics on social media have slammed the judge’s decision not to give the jurors copies of the instructions.
“They are posted online for all to read” conservative radio host Clay Travis posted on X. “Every single person in America can read them in written form except the 18 jurors. What sense does this make?”
Jurors were retold several instructions Thursday, including that they cannot hold it against Trump for not testifying, that they must set aside personal differences, and that they must not make decisions on biases or stereotypes, to name just a few of the sections Merchan reread before deliberations entered their second day.
Prosecutors gave three theories of what unlawful means Trump used to allegedly influence the 2016 election by allegedly falsifying business records to conceal a hush money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election.
Merchan told the jurors that they “must conclude unanimously that the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means,” citing New York state law, but that they need not be unanimous as to what the unlawful means were.
“In determining whether the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you may consider the following: (1) violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act, otherwise known as FECA; (2) the falsification of other business records; or (3) violation of tax laws,” Merchan said.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Trump, who appeared morose inside the courtroom Thursday morning, was wearing a cobalt blue tie, one of several sartorial variations the public has seen as he has entered and exited the Manhattan Criminal Courthouse each day since late April.
The former president has pleaded not guilty to the charges.