“This Is Insanity”: Judge In Trump Case Issues Unbelievable Jury Instructions

Update (1345ET): Legal minds are beside themselves at how the judge in the Trump ‘hush money’ case has instructed jurors to rule – first in what constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley called “the coup de grace instruction,” Judge Juan Merchan said that there is no need to agree on what occurred – and can disagree on what the crime was among the charges. 

“Merchan just delivered the coup de grace instruction,” Turley wrote on X. “He said that there is no need to agree on what occurred. They can disagree on what the crime was among the three choices.  Thus, this means that they could split 4-4-4 and he will still treat them as unanimous…”

Translation: The conviction and sentencing are pre-planned and were determined before the case even begun.pic.twitter.com/BWHO9eBQzD

— Ryan Tyre 🇺🇸 (@ryantyre) May 29, 2024

“This is absolute insanity,” posted Missouri Attorney General Andrew Baily, in response to another Turley observation – namely that the jury will not be given copies of their instructions, but can ask for them to be read again.

This is insanity.

I’ve tried many jury trials in my day. You give jurors paper instructions every time.

How are 12 jurors supposed to remember the elements necessary for each of the 34 felony counts?

This is an illicit, witch-hunt prosecution. https://t.co/KwoxH655xY

— Attorney General Andrew Bailey (@AGAndrewBailey) May 29, 2024

What could be behind this activist judge?

Biden Campaign’s Michael Tyler agrees that winning the White House won’t happen with current polls

READ: https://t.co/VWrqedqOEQ#MichaelTyler #Michael #tyler #Biden #JoeBiden #Campaign #Left #Democrat #Republicans #US #Politics #News #Viralvideo #ViralVideos #Explore pic.twitter.com/RKYyYs4rGU

— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) May 29, 2024

*  *  *

With closing arguments in Donald Trump’s hush money trial having ended on Tuesday, jury deliberations have officially begun, putting the outcome of the case in the hands of a dozen New Yorkers.

A jury of seven men and five women were instructed to begin deliberating just before 11:30 a.m., where they will weigh in on the first criminal trial of a former US president. While the jurors’ discussions will be in private, they can send Trump-hating Judge Juan Merchan notes asking to rehear testimony or review evidence.

“It is not my responsibility to judge the evidence here. It is yours,” said Merchan.

Trump is charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records in connection with an alleged scheme to shelve potentially embarrassing claims during the 2016 US election – similar to how the Clintons paid Paula Jones $850,000 to drop a sexual harassment lawsuit after more than four years of legal action.

According to Merchan, “Your verdict on each count you consider, whether guilty or not, must be unanimous,” adding “That is, each and every juror must agree to it.”

That said, they do not need to be unanimous on what crime they think Trump is guilty of.

“You should discuss the evidence and consult with each other, listen to each other, give each other’s views careful consideration. And when you deliberate, you should do so with a view to reaching agreement when that can be done without surrendering an individual juror,” Merchan continued.

As the Epoch Times notes further, all the evidence from trial has been loaded onto a laptop, and Juror 4 and Juror 6 volunteered to operate it for the group.

Merchan checked with defense attorney Todd Blanche about whether defense counsel explained to President Trump about evidence being on the laptop for jurors.

Mr. Blanche affirmed that defense counsel reviewed the contents of the laptop and have no objections to this protocol.

“I always watch the jurors. I watch to see who is paying attention and who is not,” said Merchan. “Justice Merchan said. “Each of you is very engaged in this case. But we’re not going to excuse [alternates].”

During closing arguments on Tuesday, Merchan criticized Blanche for telling the jury that the former president could go to prison if they convict – and reminded them that their decision would be based on the word of Michael Cohen, who Blanche described as a “liar” who “lied to” the jury.

“You cannot send somebody to prison, you cannot convict somebody based upon the words of Michael Cohen,” said Blanche – to which prosecutors jumped in and objected.

Merchan agreed, sustaining the objection.

“That was outrageous, Mr. Blanche,” he said. “Someone who’s been a prosecutor as long as you have, someone who’s been an attorney as long as you have knows that it’s highly inappropriate.”

Check back for updates…