New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan on April 5 granted a motion to quash former President Donald Trump’s subpoena of evidence related to NBC Universal’s “Stormy” documentary for his upcoming trial.
President Trump is facing 34 counts of falsifying business records, and his defense attorneys submitted a subpoena on March 11 for all materials connected to the documentary. On March 20, NBC filed a motion to quash the subpoena.
The documentary showcases Stephanie Gregory Clifford, also known as Stormy Daniels, who claimed to have had an affair with President Trump and is a crucial witness in the case. Prosecutors assert that President Trump’s charges are linked to a payment scheme aimed at influencing the 2016 elections, which included an alleged bribe to Ms. Clifford.
The defense had requested documents pertaining to the premiere, release date, editing, promotion, and marketing of the documentary, as well as any compensation to Ms. Clifford related to the documentary including rights and agreements. They had also sought any agreements between NBC or Ms. Clifford with Michael Cohen, another key witness in the case.
The judge deemed the subpoena “too broad.”
Documentary Timing
The defense argued that there was an agreement between NBC Universal and Ms. Clifford concerning the release of the documentary, timed to coincide with the start of the trial.
Related Stories
This would unfairly prejudice President Trump while benefiting the network and a key witness financially, the defense argued, and they sought the documents as evidence.
The network countered this, stating that these claims lacked factual support, as an executive had affirmed that Ms. Clifford had no control over the content or release of the documentary.
“Because Defendant’s claims are purely speculative and unsupported, his subpoena and the demands therein are the very definition of a fishing expedition,” the judge remarked.
The judge also mentioned that even if the request was not speculative, the defense’s demand was too expansive, seeking “unrestricted access” to the media’s materials, which would violate civil laws.
April 15 Trial
More rulings from Justice Merchan are expected as the trial approaches rapidly.
The trial is scheduled to commence with jury selection on April 15, marking the first instance in American history where a former president is facing criminal trial.
Initially planned for March 25, the trial date was slightly postponed by the judge after more than 100,000 pages of documents were unexpectedly provided to the defense last month.
Previously, the defense argued for the judge’s recusal from the case due to a perceived conflict of interest. However, the judge dismissed the motion, finding no grounds for recusal.
The defense attorneys have renewed their request, presenting new evidence indicating a conflict of interest. Recent Federal Election Commission filings revealed multiple payments made to the judge’s daughter’s marketing firm by groups fundraising with ties to this case. The defense argued that the judge now has a commercial interest in the upcoming trial.
Please rewrite the following sentence to make it easier to understand:
Original: The complex nature of the situation made it difficult to find a solution.
Rewritten: The situation was so complicated that finding a solution was challenging.
Source link
