Judge Juan Merchan criticized former President Donald Trump’s defense team during their motion for a mistrial, noting that they failed to object to certain testimony from Stormy Daniels. This was the second time this week that Merchan expressed his surprise at the lack of objections from Trump’s lawyers and rejected their motion for a mistrial. Trump’s attorney argued that Daniels changed her story regarding her encounter with Trump, but the judge questioned why there were no objections to certain testimony.
Merchan specifically noted Daniels’ testimony about Trump suggesting she would be stuck living in a trailer park before they had sex in 2006, stating that he felt it was unnecessary and objected himself. The judge also highlighted the testimony regarding Trump not wearing a condom, expressing surprise that the defense did not object to this. He questioned why there was no objection to certain details mentioned during the trial, such as the condom reference, which he found baffling.
During Daniels’ testimony, she claimed that Trump did not wear a condom when they had sex and discussed her experiences with other sexual partners during filming. Merchan also referenced the defense’s opening statement, where they denied any sexual encounter between Daniels and Trump. The judge noted that by making that assertion, the defense allowed the prosecution to delve further into the details of the encounter to prove their case and establish the credibility of Daniels’ story.
Merchan emphasized that the more specific details Daniels provided about the encounter, the more the jury could weigh the credibility of her story. He indicated that the defense’s lack of objections to certain aspects of Daniels’ testimony opened the door for the prosecution to present a more detailed account of the alleged encounter. The judge suggested that by not objecting to specific details, such as the condom reference, the defense may have inadvertently strengthened Daniels’ case.
Overall, Merchan expressed his confusion and surprise at the lack of objections from Trump’s defense team during Daniels’ testimony. He noted that certain details, such as Trump suggesting Daniels would live in a trailer park and not wearing a condom during their encounter, should have warranted objections. The judge’s rejection of the motion for a mistrial suggests that he believes the defense’s failure to object to these details may have hindered their case and inadvertently strengthened the prosecution’s arguments.
