Former President Donald Trump's lawyers and Special Counsel Jack Smith argued Friday over moving the trial date in Trump's federal secrets case to May 20, but the hearing judge decided against The hearing ended without an immediate verdict or decision on when it would begin.
U.S. District Judge Eileen Cannon heard arguments in a Florida courtroom over the trial date and other issues in the case in a hearing attended by both Trump and Smith.
Jay Blatt of the Office of Special Counsel told the judge that holding the trial before the November election does not violate Justice Department policy. Blatt said holding the trial within 60 days of the election does not contradict the Justice Department's typical aversion to bringing politically charged cases closer to elections, and said that holding the trial within 60 days of the election does not contradict the Justice Department's typical aversion to bringing politically charged cases closer to elections, starting in July. He insisted.
Blatt told Judge Cannon that the policy does not apply to cases that have already been prosecuted, so the trial will be allowed.
“We are fully following the Department of Justice manual,” Blatt said.
“This case could be heard as early as this summer,” Blatt said, accusing the defense of trying to “squeeze out of the courtroom” endless hearings that don't need to be held.
Trump's lawyer, Todd Blanche, argued that it would be “unfair” to put the president on trial for mishandling classified documents before the election.
“We continue to strongly believe that a pre-election trial is a mistake and should not happen,” Blanche said at a scheduling conference in Fort Pierce, Florida.
Blanche said it would be appropriate to start after the country votes because the trial would take four to five weeks, not including jury selection.
“There's no reason this trial can't start until late November,” Blanche said.
In Thursday's filing, Smith proposed a new trial date of July 8, while Trump's lawyers continue to propose a post-election date in 2024. If so, August 12th could be an alternative date, he said in his submission. He opposes the proposal.
Trump watched Friday's proceedings from his defense seat, leaning forward and folding his hands on the table.
Mr. Smith sat behind the team's two prosecutors, Mr. Blatt and David Harbach. It was the first time Mr. Smith and Mr. Trump were in the same courtroom together since the D.C. Circuit heard arguments on presidential immunity.
Trump's co-defendants, longtime aide Walt Nauta and Mar-a-Lago staffer Carlos de Oliveira, also attended the hearing.
In afternoon court, lawyers from the Office of the Special Counsel acknowledged that no witnesses had come forward to report threats or harassment by the defendants, but reiterated concerns about potential witness intimidation in the case. Ta.
Harbach said harassment and intimidation continues “in the case in which Mr. Trump is the defendant.”
Harbach estimated that about 40 witnesses in total would testify at trial, and argued that more than half would likely have to keep their identities secret before trial.
“This is not a hypothetical concern, this is a real concern and they know it,” he said.
However, in response to a question from Judge Cannon, Judge Harbach noted that so far no witnesses have reported any threatening behavior, although some witnesses have expressed concern about that possibility.
“No one should ever be threatened,” Cannon said, and Cannon agreed.
Defense lawyer Emile Beauvais quickly dismissed concerns about witness intimidation.
“We're not here to harm people or harass anyone,” Bove said.
Harbach added that a complete list of witnesses would eventually be released closer to trial, but cautioned against the potential to influence witnesses by releasing their names early.
“There will come a time when the identity of the witness will be known, but not now,” he said.
Judge Cannon made it clear that he would accept the request under advisement, given the need for “openness” in criminal trials.
“What is clear is that these issues are complex,” she said before dissolving the parties.
Mr. Trump's lawyers argued in court filings that the lawsuit should be dismissed entirely based on Mr. Trump's claims of presidential immunity, and the Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that Mr. He said he would consider this claim in the case.
In June last year, President Trump issued a classified statement after prosecutors said he had sabotaged the government by repeatedly refusing to return hundreds of documents containing classified information ranging from U.S. nuclear secrets to the nation's defense capabilities. Pleaded not guilty to 37 criminal charges related to handling of materials. Efforts to recover documents. The former president has denied all wrongdoing in the incident.
President Trump has been trying to delay the trial for months, and his lawyers argued in a court filing last year that given the unusual nature of the case, there was no reason to hasten it. . The special counsel team said earlier this month that Trump and his co-defendants “will do whatever it takes to delay the verdict of the charges against them by a fair and impartial jury of the people.”
