‘For the third time, a New York judge has chosen to not withdraw from a case concerning hush money transactions linked to former president Donald Trump, who was convicted in relation to these payments issued to an adult film actress. Judge Juan Merchan once again turned down the retraction request put forth by Trump’s legal team. Just as in April and August 2023, he declined to distance himself from the groundbreaking case, one of the first to result in criminal charges against a former U.S. president. Trump’s sentencing, overseen by Merchan, is set to occur on September 18.
In his verdict, issued on August 13, Merchan stated there has been no new compelling reason presented by the defendant that would require his withdrawal from the case. All promises of potential conflict of interest due to the judge’s daughter’s career in political consultancy have repeatedly been annulled, both by Merchan himself and higher-ranking court systems, and have been found to comprise inaccuracies and uncorroborated claims.
Trump’s campaign spokesman, Steven Cheung, responded with a statement voicing persistent contention regarding the matter. He contended the heavily biased judge should’ve permanently seceded from the case quite some time ago. The campaign remains perturbed by the case’s proceedings.
On May 30, a jury confirmed Trump’s guilt on 34 felony charges that stem from masking the $130,000 payment made to adult film star Stormy Daniels by Trump’s preceding personal attorney, Michael Cohen. The transaction aimed to prevent a potential sex scandal from emerging before the 2016 U.S. elections by ensuring Daniels’ silence.
Two months subsequent to the conviction, Trump’s legal aid submitted a third withdrawal request, focusing on the potential conflict arising from the judge’s daughter’s professional affiliations. She has worked for a political consultancy firm that has handled Democratic campaigns in the past, including Kamala Harris’s unsuccessful 2020 presidential run.
Current Vice President Harris is the Democratic party’s candidate positioned against Trump who is the Republican nominee for the upcoming November 5 U.S. elections. The alleged conflict, according to Trump’s lawyers, might impede fair judgment.
The criminal act of falsifying business records carries a potential penalty of up to four years incarceration. However, past cases have seen more frequent sentencing to monetary penalties or probation for those found guilty of the same.
Representatives from the office of Manhattan District Attorney, Alvin Bragg— the prosecutors responsible for the charges—have labeled Trump’s repeated request for judicial recusal as a baseless act to rehash and contest a matter that has twice previously been resolved. The defense’s attempts to discredit the trail’s fairness have been lacking in substantial proof.
Prosecutors, in their court submission on August 1, highlighted that exaggerated and fervent language could not rectify the fatal flaws in Trump’s ongoing tactics to challenge the case’s proceedings.
Daniels accepted the $130,000 payment as an agreement to remain silent concerning a sexual encounter she claimed to have had with Trump, an allegation which he denies. Despite the controversy, Trump continued to secure his position as president by defeating Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton in 2016.
In April, before jury selection for the trial and again post an ethics panel’s conclusive report stating that his daughter’s professional commitments did not provoke doubts about Merchan’s fairness, the judge rejected recusal requests.
Throughout the trial, Trump availed of his social media presence to describe Merchan as a highly biased overseer of a sham court, evidencing frustration and dissatisfaction with the judicial process.
Trump’s social media activity became a significant aspect of the case prior to trial, with comments regarding Merchan’s daughter’s professional motives adding to factors that led Merchan to extend a gag order. This order restricted Trump from making public remarks involving family members of court personnel or the prosecution.
In addition to recusal requests, Trump’s legal team has also asked the court to dismiss his conviction. This step is influenced by the Supreme Court’s ruling last July, granting former presidents significant immunity from prosecution related to official actions taken during their tenure.
Merchan offered a timeline for the resolution of these issues, stating he will reach a decision concerning Trump’s pleas by September 16. This decision, like each step in the case so far, will amplify the scenario’s already significant legal and political implications.
NY Judge Resists Recusal in Trump Hush Money Case Yet Again appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
