Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg was reportedly warned by a legal analyst Monday about the risk of confusing jurors. Rebecca Roiphe, a legal analyst and former Manhattan ADA, opened up about the risks involved in an opinion column that was published by the New York Times.

Trump Was Indicted On Charges Of Falsifying Business Records In Hush Money Trial

Donald Trump, the presumptive 2024 Republican presidential nominee, faced trial for a criminal case earlier this month. His indictment was processed in March 2023 based on charges related to falsifying business records.

Source: Wikimedia/Gage Skidmore

The root of the case is connected to hush money that was allegedly paid to Stormy Daniels, an adult film star, during Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

Analyst Claims Core Of Case Is ‘Business Integrity’ And Not ‘Something Sexier’

Roiphe explained in the article that the core of the case was not “something sexier,” which she claimed was what the lawyers on both sides tried to emphasize with the case. Roiphe highlighted the falsification of the business records as the root of the actual case.

Source: Pixabay/Aymane Jdidi

She also warned that the prosecution could be at risk of confusing the jury if they focus more on alleged interference of the 2016 election instead of the falsification of business records.

Analyst Focuses On ‘Elements Of The Crime’, Highlights The ‘Real Elements’ To Consider

Roiphe stated that “the elements of the crime in this case do not require a finding that Mr. Trump interfered with the 2016 election” for the prosecution. She referenced that it does not matter if Trump had sex with Stormy Daniels.

Source: Pixabay/Mike Braun

According to Roiphe, “the real elements” focus on how “Mr. Trump used his business for a cover-up.” Emphasizing the crime that he intended to conceal instead of the falsified business records puts the prosecution at risk of “confusing the jury into thinking about whether the lies affected the election.”

Prosecutors May Lead Jurors To Question ‘Talking Point’ Promoted By Trump

Roiphe also claimed that the prosecution may possibly lead the jury to question why Donald Trump was not charged by the federal government for any crimes related to the election. Roiphe acknowledged that this matter is a “talking point” that Trump “has promoted publicly.”

Source: Wikimedia/Brandon Rush

Trump has used his Truth Social account on multiple occasions to discuss the circumstances surrounding the case. He has frequently referred to the overall case a political witch hunt.

Judge Merchan Imposed Gag Order On Donald Trump Regarding This Case

Judge Juan Merchan, who is currently presiding over the case in question, reportedly imposed a gag order on Donald Trump last month. This gag order essentially bars Trump from making any public statement about the witnesses involved, such as Stormy Daniels and Michael Cohen.

Source: Pixabay/Sergei Tokmakov

The gag order also covers staff members and lawyers in addition to their respective families. However, Bragg and Merchan were initially excluded from the order.

Gag Order Modified After Trump Targeted Judge Merchan’s Daughter On Social Media

Donald Trump used his Truth Social platform to essentially target Judge Merchan’s daughter with his posts even after the gag order was initially issued. In a post that he made in late March, Trump stated that Judge Merchan was “totally compromised.”

Source: Pixabay/Firmbee

He added that Merchan “should be removed from the Trump Non-Case immediately.” Trump also stated that the judge’s daughter, Loren, was “a rabid Trump hater” that “admitted to having conversations with her father about me and yet he gagged me.”

National Enquirer Parent Company CEO, Longtime Friend Of Trump, Took The Stand

David Pecker, a longtime friend of Donald Trump, reportedly took the stand recently. Pecker is the CEO and president of the parent company of the National Enquirer.

Source: Flickr/Thomas Hawk

Pecker confirmed that he met with Cohen and Trump in August 2015 at the Trump Tower. According to his testimony, he agreed to publish negative stories about political opponents and positive stories about Donald Trump.

Stormy Daniels Claimed To Have Consensual Sexual Encounter With Trump In 2006

Stormy Daniels claimed that she and Donald Trump had a consensual sexual encounter in July 2006. At the time, Trump was married to his current spouse Melania.

Source: Flickr/Victoria Pickering

The alleged encounter took place at a celebrity golf tournament in Lake Tahoe. According to Daniels, the affair between her and Trump lasted for several months.

Daniels Claimed To Have Text Messages, Other Communications With Trump

Stormy also claimed that she and Donald Trump stayed in contact with their initial encounter. They allegedly exchanged phone calls and met in different locations.

Source: Pixabay/Dean Moriarty

Daniels provided multiple photographs of her and Donald Trump together as evidence of their alleged relationship. She also provided proof of other communications and text messages shared between the two.

Daniels Claims That Trump Attorney Michael Cohen Paid Daniels $130,000 To Keep Quiet

Stormy claimed that she was contacted by Trump’s personal attorney, Michael Cohen, weeks before the 2016 presidential election. Cohen allegedly paid Daniels $130,000 to remain silent regarding her affair with Donald Trump.

Source: Wikimedia/IowaPolitics

The payment was reportedly made through the conditions outlined in a nondisclosure agreement.

Campaign Finance Laws Called Into Question With $130,000 Payment

Campaign finance laws were called into question as a result of the $130,000 payment made to Stormy Daniels. The main concern was whether the payment violated those laws.

Source: Pixabay

According to the allegations, the substantial payment was considered an excessive-in-kind and unreported contribution to the presidential campaign of Donald Trump. Its intent was to influence the overall outcome of the election through stopping negative information from emerging in the press about Trump.

Stormy Daniels Sued Trump In Attempt To Invalidate Nondisclosure Agreement

Daniels filed a lawsuit against the former U.S. President in March 2018. The intent of the lawsuit was to invalidate the nondisclosure agreement related to his $130,000 payment.

Source: Flickr/Focal Foto

Daniels argued that Trump not signing the agreement meant that it was not legally binding. Trump’s legal team worked hard behind the scenes in an attempt to get the agreement enforced and stop Daniels from speaking publicly about their affair.

Michael Cohen Pled Guilty To Multiple Charges, Implicated Trump

Michael Cohen made headlines in August of 2018 when he struck a plea deal that required him to enter a guilty plea regarding multiple charges. The campaign finance violations connected to the hush money payments made to Stormy Daniels were included in the charges.

Source: Pixabay/Gerd Altmann

He also confirmed that he made a “hush money payment” to an additional woman, Karen McDougal. Cohen reportedly implicated Donald Trump as a result of the plea deal simply by stating that Trump directed him to make the payments.

Trump Denied Knowledge Of Payment, But Then Acknowledged Reimbursement

Trump initially denied any knowledge of the $130,000 payment made to Stormy Daniels. However, his story apparently changed as time passed.

Source: Pixabay/Pexels

The former Commander-in-Chief later confirmed that he reimbursed Cohen for the $130,000 payment made. However, he claimed that the transaction was of a private nature and not a violation of campaign finance laws.