Thread by @NormEisen

BREAKING: in the New York election interference case the judge has ruled on the motions in limine

It’s a disaster for Trump and a home run for the DA

Probably a signal that trial will proceed in April

A thread 1/x

nycourts.gov/LegacyPDFS/pre…

The above link was to the rulings on Trump’s motions and here is the link to the rulings on the DA’s

DA won almost everything & Trump lost almost everything

2/xnycourts.gov/LegacyPDFS/pre…

Trump moved to preclude the testimony of Cohen because his actions supposedly suggest he may commit perjury

But there is NO law that supports keeping a witness off the stand because his credibility has been called into question in the past

DENIED

3/x

Trump also moved to prevent any testimony from or about the 3 hush money recipients Dino Sajudin, Karen McDougal & Stormy Daniels

DENIED

Testimony from these individuals is essential to the case so long as limited to the facts

4/x

Trump moved to prevent the DA from arguing that Trump improperly influenced the 2020 election

(Yeah right)

He also moved to prevent arguments w/r/t Trump's intent to defraud & the "catch and kill" scheme

ALL DENIED. Merchan ruled that Trump & team used these 3 motions to reargue issues already ruled upon

5/x

1 little win for Trump but it is meh

His motion to preclude polygraphs taken by Daniels is GRANTED

The bar for introducing this kind of evidence is high & judge was right

6/x

OK back to Trump losing. He asked the court to preclude evidence re: the infamous Access Hollywood tape

(again) DENIED

That's bc--as the Judge wrote in his order on the DA's motions--the tape speaks to Trump's "intent & motive for making the payment to Daniels & then, attempting to conceal them"

7/x

This plus ruling on referencing 2020 ruling (tweet 5/x above) = HUGE because DA will argue 2016 was the original election interference case

This evidence allows him to do that

8/x

Trump also moved for the Court to preclude the DA from making arguments about FECA's ambit

But Judge Merchan already ruled on this Trump argument in rejecting his motions to dismiss

So, again, this argument is DENIED

9/x

Trump also asked the court to preclude evidence of 3rd party admissions of FECA violations

DENIED IN PART: DA can introduce them to establish the underlying facts of the agreements

But GRANTED IN PART: DA cannot argue that those admissions are probative of Trump’s guilt (duh)

10/x

Back again to DENIED

Judge threw out Trump's request to preclude evidence re: AMI’s books--so long as DA uses this evidence to advance one of the 3 permissible theories of other crimes

11/x

In another request rehashing his rejected MTD, Trump asked the court to preclude the DA from arguing that his trust is an "enterprise"

DENIED

& w an explicit caution from Judge not to raise again to jury (oof)

12/x

Next, Trump asked the court to preclude the DA from using Weisselberg's alleged notes as evidence

That issue has been rightly RESERVED for trial, when the DA has the chance to properly lay the foundation for this evidence

13/x

Trump then asked the court to preclude evidence concerning Rudy Giuliani

But the DA hasn't sought to introduce any such evidence--so Judge Merchan rightly found that the issue is MOOT

14/x

Trump also argued that the DA must offer proof that ~100 of his statements are admissible "on the grounds that they are irrelevant, stale and cumulative"

But that's something for Trump to object to when the DA has actually offered the statements--not now

DENIED

15/x

Finally, Trump asked the Judge to order the DA to disclose a "realistic" exhibit list b/c current 1 supposedly is in a "state of disarray"

The Judge agreed w the DA that "whatever disorganization there may appear to be is of [Trump's] own doing" but directed the DA to update the list w any changes

16/x

NOW TO DA’S MOTIONS IN LIMINE

1st up: DA's motion to exclude Brad Smith's testimony re: federal election law

GRANTED IN PART: he can't testify as a lay fact witness or offer opinions interpreting election law

DENIED IN PART: Smith can testify gen’ly about the FEC but judge will strike any testimony that deviates

17/x

Next, the DA moved to exclude Trump mentioning the FEC or DOJ so you to proceeded against Trump

Judge finds Trump args about something that DIDN’T happen are "probative of nothing"

Both DA requests GRANTED

18/x

The DA also moved to exclude evidence or arg re: selective prosecution

Trump says he won't use this as a basis for acquittal, so Judge rules as MOOT

But he also precludes Trump from re-litigating related issues--& warns both parties not to circumvent his rulings at trial

19/x

Next, the DA requested judge exclude evidence re: DOJ's views of Cohen's credibility

But as any good trial lawyer will know: ya can't impeach a witness w/ hearsay

That includes, as Merchan ruled, "the opinions of federal prosecutors"

GRANTED

20/x

The DA moved to exclude arg re: Trump's alleged reliance on advice of counsel (unless he establishes a factual predicate for it)

This too is GRANTED

That includes Trump's "amorphous defense of presence of counsel"

Both risk confusing & misleading the jury

21/x

The DA also made a blanket request that the court exclude any evidence or arg re: Trump defenses the court has already rejected

For obvious reasons (see tweets 9 & 12), this is GRANTED

22/x

Finally, the DA moved to introduce "Molineux" evidence (i.e. evidence of other wrongs or acts that's admissible only in limited circumstances)

This ruling is somewhat of a mixed bag

But that's to be expected--as I noted in tweet 6, the bar for the DA here is high

23/x

DA'S PRIOR BAD ACTS EVIDENCE REQUESTS pt. 1

GRANTED IN PART: DA can introduce evidence surrounding Trump Tower meeting & of the $50k expense claim re: Cohen's payments to tech firm RedFinch

RESERVED IN PART: Whether DA can use evidence re: AMI allegedly publishing flattering Trump stories & negative ones about his opponents

24/x

DA'S PRIOR BAD ACTS EVIDENCE REQUESTS pt. 2

GRANTED IN PART: The DA can introduce evidence about the infamous Access Hollywood tape (but not necessarily the tape itself--Trump can still challenge that)

RESERVED IN PART: The DA needs to offer further proof for why certain sexual assault allegations against Trump can be admitted

25/x

DA'S PRIOR BAD ACTS EVIDENCE REQUESTS pt. 3

RESERVED IN PART: The DA must offer further proof of why evidence of the following should be admissible

(1) Trump's alleged witness pressure campaign
(2) social media posts harassing Cohen & Daniels
(3) Trump's 04/2023 lawsuit against Cohen
(4) Trump's previous comments "endorsing aggressive attacks on one's perceived opponents"

26/x

Again, the bar for introducing evidence of prior bad acts is high--so it makes sense for Judge Merchan to demand additional proof before ruling either way

All in all, the DA's motions in limine fared very well before Judge Merchan

But--as I think this thread makes plainly clear--hardly the same can be said for Trump's

FIN