Judge overturns Trump’s silence order, allowing him to speak about witnesses and jury after secret conviction

NEW YORK – A judge on Tuesday modified Donald Trump’s silence order, allowing the former president to speak publicly about witnesses and jurors in the hush money criminal trial that led to his criminal conviction, but at least barring other people connected to the former’s case president until the verdict on July 11.

Judge Juan M. Merchan’s ruling – days before Trump’s debate with President Joe Biden on Thursday – allows the presumptive GOP nominee to resume his attack on his former lawyer Michael Cohen, porn actor Stormy Daniels and other witnesses. Trump was convicted on May 30 of falsifying documents to cover up a potential sex scandal, making him the first former president to be convicted of a crime.

” READ MORE: Trump is rallying in North Philadelphia, trying to woo voters in Pennsylvania’s bluest big city

Trump’s lawyers do urged Merchan to lift the gag order entirely, arguing that there is no justification for continuing to restrict Trump’s First Amendment rights after the trial. Trump said the gag order has made it impossible for him to defend himself while Cohen and Daniels continue to bash him.

The Manhattan district attorney’s office has asked Merchan to maintain a silence order barring him from speaking about jurors, court staff and the prosecution team at least until Trump is sentenced on July 11, but said last week it would not allow Trump to comment on witnesses. when the process is finished. Prosecutors opposed lifting the jury ban on commenting.

Trump was convicted of 34 counts of falsifying business records, which prosecutors said was an attempt to cover up a secret payment of money to Daniels just before the 2016 presidential election. She claims she had sexual intercourse with Trump ten years earlier, which he denies.

” READ MORE: Donald Trump spent the weekend with Philadelphia rapper OT7 Quanny

The crime is punishable by up to four years in prison, but prosecutors have not said whether they will seek a prison sentence and it is unclear whether Merchan would impose such a sentence. Other options include a fine or probation.

After his conviction, Trump complained that he was under a “nasty order of silence” while testing his limits. In remarks the day after his conviction, Trump called Cohen a “scumbag,” though not by name.

In a subsequent interview with Newsmax, Trump disagreed with the jury and its makeup, complaining about Manhattan: “It’s a very, very liberal Democratic area, so I knew we were in real trouble,” and claiming: “I never saw even the slightest smile from the jury.” No, it was a very unfair place. A miniature fraction of the population is Republican.”

Trump’s lawyers, who expressed the impression that the silence order would result in a verdict, wrote a letter to Merchan on June 4 asking him to lift the order.

Prosecutors urged Merchan to maintain the silence order’s prohibition on speaking about jurors and trial staff “at least through the sentencing hearing and the consideration of any post-trial motions.” They argued that the judge had a “duty to protect the integrity of these proceedings and to administer justice fairly.”

” READ MORE: Two of Donald Trump’s former lawyers have filed a lawsuit in Pennsylvania alleging widespread voter fraud

On March 26, weeks before the trial was to begin, Merchan issued a silence order to Trump after prosecutors raised concerns about the presumptive Republican presidential nominee’s tendency to attack people involved in his affairs.

Merchan later expanded it to ban comments about his own family after Trump published social media posts attacking the judge’s daughter, a Democratic political consultant. The order did not prohibit speaking about Merchan or District Attorney Alvin Bragg, whose office prosecuted the case.

During the trial, Merchan found Trump in contempt of court, fined him $10,000 for violating the silence order, and threatened to put him in jail if he did it again.

In an attempt to overturn the gag order, Trump’s lawyers, Todd Blanche and Emil Bove, argued that Trump was entitled to “unrestricted campaign contributions” in delicate of Biden’s comments public comments about the verdict, and Cohen and Daniels continued to criticize public opinion.