I once knew a lawyer who was instructed by his client to say something that they knew would result in a sanctioned mistrial. After warning his client that he would say it, but the client had to pay the sanction, he went in and did it.
It had the predicted results.
Just watching Trump and his trial team in New York, my guess is that's what they're angling for. And they may well get it. When the Judge noted that he would "draw every negative inference" if he had to exclude Trump from the courtroom, he likely went too far.
There are things that the Court can do, but it hasn't done them. Getting Trump to shut up, and the trial team not to be an embarrassment to lawyers, probably isn't going to happen.
If a mistrial results, we'll see post mistrial motions, a petition for a new judge, etc., that will keep things rolling for months. The strategy may be to get past next year's election, at which he'll use his hoped for Oval Office position, if he gets it, to halt or at least push way back proceedings.
The Federal Government has no control over state courts, but a campaign that's already exploring calling out troops and declaring an emergency, if he wins, is willing to go pretty far.
So, it may not be a lack of control by the defendant or the lawyers, so much as a strategy.
One possible explanation, however.
No comments:
Post a Comment