NEW YORK — The legal team representing President-elect Donald Trump is introducing fresh allegations as part of their ongoing efforts to challenge the conviction linked to hush money payments. They assert that the historic ruling has been compromised due to alleged juror misconduct.
In a public court document issued this week, prosecutors countered the defense’s claims by dismissing them as “unsworn, unsupported” hearsay, suggesting that such allegations are merely an attempt to erode public trust in the judicial process surrounding this case. Trump’s attorneys sent a letter to Judge Juan M. Merchan, in which they asserted that they possess “evidence of grave juror misconduct” that emerged during the trial. However, specifics regarding these allegations were omitted from the available documents, leaving the public in the dark.
The defense’s correspondence, dated December 3, has been added to the legal records, alongside two redacted replies from the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office dated December 5 and 9. Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung characterized the proceedings as a “Witch Hunt,” claiming that “partisan political motivations” had compromised the integrity of the jury’s deliberations.
Cheung further accused both the district attorney, Alvin Bragg, and Judge Merchan of allowing their personal biases to influence the trial, expressing disappointment that they had not rigorously investigated the alleged misconduct. He urged the judge to dismiss the case outright. “It is clear that more information needs to be disclosed concerning the alleged misconduct, and those with such knowledge should step forward and act justly,” he stated.
As Judge Merchan deliberates on a request from Trump’s legal team to dismiss the case given the president-elect’s upcoming inauguration, prosecutors cautioned that the defense’s assertions might muddy the established verdict. They pointed out that the claims were presented through a letter rather than a formal dismissal motion and challenged the defense’s reluctance to pursue a court hearing where alleged juror misconduct could be thoroughly examined.
Trump’s lawyers, Todd Blanche and Emil Bove, contended in their letter that conducting a hearing could be “extensive, time-consuming, and invasive,” potentially complicating Trump’s transition to office. In response, prosecutors indicated that the defense’s opposition to such a hearing suggested an attempt to compel the judge to accept their claims as fact without proper scrutiny.
In a separate correspondence, Judge Merchan clarified that the redactions were made to protect the integrity of the case and to safeguard the jurors’ identities, emphasizing the importance of maintaining their privacy. He noted that some content in the defense’s letter was extensively redacted, describing the allegations as purely unsworn and risking the case’s integrity while potentially endangering jurors.
He stressed that any claims involving juror misconduct necessitate a thorough investigation but reminded that the court cannot reach conclusions based solely on hearsay and speculation. Trump continues to contest his conviction, which took place on May 30 for 34 counts related to falsifying business records to hide a $130,000 payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in an effort to silence her claims regarding their past encounter, which Trump denies. The payment occurred right before the 2016 presidential election.
On a procedural note, Merchan recently denied Trump’s request to dismiss the case based on presidential immunity, indicating that a recent Supreme Court ruling granting the former president certain protections did not necessitate a dismissal of the case at hand. Trump’s immunity argument is one of many efforts his legal team has employed to have the conviction overturned.
Following Trump’s success in last month’s elections, the judge postponed his sentencing, originally scheduled for late November, in order to allow both parties to discuss potential next steps. Trump’s attorneys contended that any measure other than immediate dismissal would disrupt the peaceful transition of power and infringe upon constitutional principles.
Prosecutors have suggested various alternatives to preserve the verdict, including pausing the case until Trump leaves office in 2029, stipulating that any sentencing would not involve incarceration, or applying a legal precedent used when a defendant passes away, thereby indicating a conviction without a sentencing outcome. Trump’s legal team dismissed these options as “absurd”, voicing objections to all proposed solutions.
As Trump prepares to assume office on January 20, he is notable for being the first former president in U.S. history to be convicted of a felony while simultaneously being an elected official.