Wildcard witness and untested legal theory: How strong is first Trump case?
By Nada Tawfik & Kayla Epstein
An adult film star. Alleged secret payments. A turncoat lawyer. And a candidate for president of the United States.
Donald Trump’s very first criminal trial – and the first of a former US president – involves charges of white-collar crime, but it features some of the most eye-catching details in any of the four criminal cases against him.
The case revolves around a $130,000 (£104,000) hush money payment from Mr Trump’s lawyer to adult-film actress Stormy Daniels, who claims she had an affair with Trump in 2006.
But that payment was not actually illegal. Instead, the blockbuster case bringing 34 felony charges is based on allegations the former president falsified business records to cover up the payment – made just before the 2016 election – to avoid an embarrassing sex scandal which he denies.
The trial, which starts in New York on Monday, has legal experts divided on the strength of the case. Some debate whether Manhattan’s District Attorney Alvin Bragg, a Democrat, should have even brought the case and whether it is strong enough.
Ambrosio Rodriguez, a former prosecutor who says he is no fan of the former president, believes the case legitimises Mr Trump’s ongoing argument that he is being prosecuted unfairly because of who he is.
Mr Rodriguez argues that the case relies on old allegations, noting that federal prosecutors had investigated and declined to bring charges.
“This is a waste of time and a bad idea, and not good for the country,” he told the BBC. “This seems just a political need and want to get Trump no matter what the costs are.”
