FORT PIERCE, Fla. >> A federal judge indicated on Tuesday that commencing former President Donald Trump’s highly anticipated criminal trial for mishandling classified documents in December may be too soon. However, she did not state whether she would agree to Trump’s request to postpone the trial until after the 2024 election.
Judge Aileen Cannon stated that she would issue a written order promptly following the nearly two-hour hearing in federal court in Fort Pierce, Florida. During the hearing, Trump’s lawyers argued for an indefinite delay of the trial date.
The debate over setting a trial date, which is typically a routine matter in criminal cases, highlights the unprecedented nature of prosecuting a former president who is also running for the White House in 2024.
Trump has consistently denied any wrongdoing and criticized the prosecution as an attempt to undermine his campaign.
Trump’s legal team contends that a fair trial before the election is impossible and that they require additional time to review evidence and prepare for what they describe as a complex case.
The judge repeatedly encouraged Trump’s lawyers to establish certain dates and a more defined timetable, while acknowledging their need for more time to review documents and footage.
“We need to establish a timetable,” Cannon asserted. “Some deadlines can be set now.”
She also inquired about previous cases involving classified documents that were tried within a similarly short timeframe.
Special counsel Jack Smith’s team, which is advocating for a December trial start, informed the judge that the case is not intricate and does not necessitate a lengthy delay. They dismissed the defense’s insinuation that Trump was charged because of his presidential candidacy. Prosecutor David Harbach maintained that there was “no political influence.”
“None of our team members are political appointees,” he clarified, emphasizing that they are all career prosecutors.
It marked the first occasion on which arguments were presented before Judge Cannon, who has faced heightened scrutiny following a court ruling last year that critics deemed unduly favorable to Trump. Trump’s co-defendant, Walt Nauta, attended the hearing, while Trump himself did not. He traveled to Iowa on Tuesday to tape a town hall event with Fox News host Sean Hannity.
Trump and Nauta previously pleaded not guilty to a 38-count indictment before a federal judge in Miami. The indictment accuses them of conspiring to conceal classified documents taken from the White House and transported to Mar-a-Lago at the conclusion of Trump’s presidency in January 2021.
The court proceeding unfolded just hours after Trump revealed that he had received a target letter from the Justice Department in a separate investigation into his and his allies’ efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. These letters frequently precede an indictment.
Harbach informed the judge that Trump’s legal team had repeatedly suggested that he should receive different treatment because of his presidential candidacy.
“He should be treated like any other individual,” Harbach remarked. “He is not different from any other busy, important person.”
However, Todd Blanche, one of Trump’s lawyers, challenged the notion that this case should be treated like any other. Trump’s legal team believes that the circumstances will be more conducive to a fair trial after the election.
“It is intellectually dishonest to claim that this case is similar to any other case,” Blanche insisted. “It is not.”
Chris Kise, a Trump lawyer, requested that the judge consider the amount of attention the case was receiving and whether impartial jurors could be found before an election. Cannon, however, stated that she would first like to focus on the discovery process and establish a concrete “road map” for the case.
Kise suggested reconvening in November to discuss scheduling the trial. As the hearing drew to a close, Kise stated a preference for a mid-November 2024 trial date.
Judge Cannon also presided over a lawsuit that the Trump team filed last year in response to the FBI search of Mar-a-Lago in August 2022. Her decision to grant Trump’s request for a special master to conduct an independent review of the classified documents seized by the FBI drew criticism and scrutiny from legal experts. A three-judge federal appeals court later overturned the order, ruling that Judge Cannon lacked the authority to issue such a ruling.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
