Manhattan prosecutors ask for ‘gag order’ to include Trump speech in his first criminal trial | International

Manhattan district attorneys investigating Donald Trump’s bribery case against porn actress Stormy Daniels asked a judge on Monday for a gag order to protect the judge, witnesses and others involved in the case. The formula includes restricting Trump’s typically language-laden speech, as has already happened during investigations into four other criminal charges against him in Washington. A gag order would limit the possibility of public comment, sometimes offensive – as was the case in a New York civil trial for defamation – and sometimes excessively revealing, while in the same process, he identified, in the worst cases, the terms, some of the judge’s to the assistants.

He The Stormy Daniels case It will be the first of four criminal cases, with a jury empaneled on March 25. Trump, the favorite Republican candidate in his party’s November presidential primaries, is accused of paying the adult film actress $130,000 in cash in 2016 to buy her silence about the extramarital affair. The bribes were recorded as legal expenses in his company’s accounts, although the aim was to prevent any publicity of the affair damaging his electoral options. The payment irregularities, considered by the prosecutor’s office to be falsification of commercial records, border on violations of campaign finance laws.

If the judge in charge of the case, Juan Merchan — the same one who read 34 criminal charges against him last April — approves the gag order, Trump will be barred from making statements about court personnel that “materially interfere with the case,” the owner said. Except for Alvin Bragg, his relatives, any member of the jury, and the Manhattan prosecutors. Prosecutors’ demand to clamp down on Trump’s speech marks a significant increase in his numerous run-ins with justice.

“The need for such protection is imperative,” they wrote in their petition. “The defendant has a long history of public and inflammatory comments about participants in the various judicial proceedings against him, including judges, witnesses, lawyers and court staff (…) those comments as well as the inevitable reactions they provoked among followers and associates. The accused, pose a substantial and imminent threat to the orderly administration of this criminal process and have substantial potential to cause material harm,” they argued.

Trump’s intemperance has led to reprimands from some judges. In a civil trial for persistent fraud in his businesses, for which he has been ordered to pay $355 million plus interest – and which his lawyers appealed this Monday -, Judge Arthur Angoron was forced to ask the former president’s lawyers if they would control. His client, in the same way as someone else begs to spank their dog. Trump’s ineptitude, ineptitude and outbursts in court have often put judges and magistrates on the spot.

“This is election interference pure and simple”

Join EL PAÍS to follow all the news and read without limits.

Subscribe

Trump, who has pleaded not guilty to each of the 91 criminal charges that make up the four indictments against him, has previously made the attack. Gag order which had been imposed on him in two other cases, in Washington and New York. His lawyers have argued that they violated their client’s First Amendment rights, which include freedom of expression, by “suppressing” Trump’s central political speech as a presidential candidate.

His defense this Monday once again lamented the request of “another crooked Democratic prosecutor (Alvin Bragg) who Gag order The restrictive measure, which, if approved, would unconstitutionally violate First Amendment rights, including your ability to defend yourself and the right of all Americans to hear from President Trump. “This is election interference pure and simple,” campaign spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement.

Bragg’s office, citing two instances of gag orders, has emphasized that today’s request is especially necessary because it is the first criminal trial of a former president in United States history. Because it’s at the state level, if he’s convicted, he won’t be able to recuse himself or invalidate the process if he reaches the White House in November, which could lead to other federal charges.

Subscribe here Newsletter EL PAÍS Get all the main information on current events from the Americas and in the region