Jonathan Turley: I believe Trump verdict will be 'reversed' in state or federal systems

E

SEEN IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS.

>> Shannon: ALL RIGHT, JUDGE,

I WANT TO BRING IN

PROFESSOR JONATHAN TURLEY, WHO

HAS BEEN IN THE COURTROOM TODAY.

SO YOU ARE FRESH OUT OF THERE.

CAN YOU GIVE US ANY OF THE

FLAVOR?

BECAUSE WHEN WE THOUGHT THE

COURT WAS GOING TO BREAK FOR THE

DAY, IT SEEMS LIKE

PRESIDENT TRUMP AND HIS TEAM

SEEMED TO RELAX, THAT HE WAS

SMILING.

MAYBE THEY THOUGHT, OKAY, THIS

JURY IS GOING TO STILL

STRUGGLING, GOING TO LEAVE

TONIGHT NOT DIGGING IT TO SAY AN

WE GET WORD THAT THE VERDICT IS

COMING IN.

CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT THE MOOD

IN THE COURTHOUSE?

>> IT WAS ONE OF THE MOST

BIZARRE MOMENTS I HAVE HAD IN A

COURTROOM, AND I WAS JUST

OBSERVING.

THE JUDGE HAD JUST SAID THAT THE

JURY COULD NOT REACH A DECISION.

AND THAT WE WOULD BE DISMISSED

FOR THE DAY.

SOME REPORTERS ACTUALLY GATHERED

THEIR STUFF AND WERE STARTING TO

LEAVE.

AND THEN THE JUDGE CAME AND

BASICALLY SAID, MY MISTAKE.

WE JUST GOT A NOTE SAYING

THERE'S A VERDICT.

THROUGHOUT THIS TIME, YOU COULD

FEEL THE BUILDING PRESSURE IN

THAT COURTROOM.

THE ONE PERSON THAT DIDN'T SEEM

TO REGISTER IT WAS THE FORMER

PRESIDENT.

HE HAD BEEN CHATTING WITH

COUNSEL.

HE DIDN'T SHOW ANY EMOTION AT

ALL.

AS THIS MANTRA OF GUILTY VERDICT

OF GUILTY VERDICT WAS READ AND

THERE WAS A GREAT, I THINK THIS

IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT

REALLY EMBODIES THE ENTIRE TRUMP

ERA.

THERE WERE PEOPLE WHO CLEARLY

WERE THRILLED BY THE RESULT.

AND THERE WERE PEOPLE THAT WILL

BE VERY SAD BY IT.

I WAS SADDENED TO WATCH IT.

I DISAGREE WITH THIS VERDICT.

I THINK, AS I HAVE SAID BEFORE,

THAT THIS CASE WAS LEGALLY

UNFOUNDED.

WHEN THEY WERE READING THOSE

GUILTY VERDICTS, THE ONE THING

THAT WE DIDN'T KNOW IS REALLY

WHAT HE WAS FOUND GUILTY OF,

BECAUSE IF YOU REMEMBER, THE

JUDGE ALLOWED THE JURY TO FIND

GUILT ON ANY 1 OF 3 SECONDARY

CRIMES.

WE WEREN'T TOLD WHETHER THE JURY

FOUND ANY ONE OF THOSE CRIMES,

WHETHER THEY FOUND ALL THREE OF

THOSE CRIMES.

I'M NOT TOO SURE WE WILL KNOW

THAT.

THAT'S ONE OF THE MANY ISSUES

THAT I THINK PRESENTS REVERSIBLE

PROBLEMS IN THIS CASE.

SO WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT THIS

IS A HISTORIC MOMENT.

WE ALL HAVE TO TAKE A BREATH.

BUT FOR THOSE UPSET BY THIS

VERDICT, REMEMBER, THIS REMAINS

A COUNTRY COMMITTED TO THE RULE

OF LAW.

AND THIS IS GOING TO GO UP ON

APPEAL.

I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE

REVERSED IN THE STATE OR FEDERAL

SYSTEMS.

BUT IT'S MOMENTS LIKE THIS, WHEN

YOU ARE ON THE OTHER SIDE, WHEN

YOU DISAGREE WITH A VERDICT,

THAT YOU HAVE TO TAKE A LEAP OF

FAITH IN THE RULE OF LAW.

IT'S WHAT DEFINES US.

MANY PEOPLE FEEL THAT THIS CASE

REALLY EMBODIED THE ANTITHESIS

OF THAT.

BUT AS A COUNTRY AS A WHOLE, WE

HAVE A SYSTEM IN PLACE TO REVIEW

THIS.

FOR DONALD TRUMP, THAT'S NOT

GOING TO HAPPEN BEFORE THE

ELECTION, IN ALL LIKELIHOOD.

BUT LET'S KEEP IN MIND THAT THIS

IS NOT THE ONLY COURT.

IT'S JUST THE FIRST ONE.

>> Shannon: WELL, AND THERE

HAVE ALSO BEEN JURY TRIALS AND

JUDGES AND DECISIONS THAT HAVE

BEEN MADE THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN

TOUGH FOR THE FORMER PRESIDENT

AND OTHER CONTACTS, TOO, IN THE

BUSINESS CONTEXT AND A PERSONAL

CASE INVOLVING E. JEAN CARROLL.

THERE ARE OTHER DECISIONS MADE

AGAINST HIM THAT HAVE BEEN VERY

DIFFICULT.

THEY'VE BEEN IN NEW YORK.

WHAT DO YOU THINK THAT PORTENDS

OR DOES NOT WITH THESE OTHER

CASES WE HAVE PENDING?

GEORGE IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT

IS GOING TO GET TO TRIAL BEFORE

WE GET TO NOVEMBER.

THE TWO FEDERAL CASES, WE ARE

WAITING FOR THE SUPREME COURT

DECISION ON IMMUNITY THAT COULD

COME AS EARLY AS NEXT THURSDAY,

WE GET OPINION AGAIN.

WHAT WILL THAT CASE MEAN TO ALL

OF THESE THINGS THAT ARE PENDING

OR HAVE ALREADY BEEN DECIDED

WHEN IT COMES TO THIS QUESTION,

YOU KNOW, WE HEARD THE

ARGUMENTS, THE SUPREME COURT,

THERE WERE TWO EXTREMES.

EVERYTHING AT ANYTHING THE

PRESIDENT DOES, YOU CAN'T

QUESTION ANY OF IT, THERE MUST

BE FULL IMMUNITY FROM ANY KIND

OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY.

SO THERE IS NOTHING, NO

PROTECTION FOR HIM.

WE KNOW THE JUSTICES ARE GOING

TO LAND, WE THINK, SOMEWHERE IN

BETWEEN, NOT WITH THOSE EXTREMEW

IS THAT DECISION AS WE WAIT FOR

THAT?

>> IT IS VERY CRITICAL BOTH IN

TERMS OF THE LAW AND THE TIMING.

THE COURT DID SEEM TO REJECT THE

EXTREMES ON BOTH SIDES.

THEY DIDN'T LIKE THE EXTREMES OF

THE TRUMP TEAM IN TERMS OF THE

SWEEPING IMMUNITY, BUT THEY ALSO

DIDN'T LIKE THE COURT OF APPEALS

APPROACH.

THEY FELT THAT IT GAVE TOO

LITTLE RECOGNITION OF THE NEEDS

OF THE OFFICE.

SO THEY COULD END UP SENDING

THIS BACK FOR FURTHER EVIDENCE

AND FOR DETERMINATIONS BY THE

TRIAL COURT.

IT SEEMS UNLIKELY THAT THE JUDGE

WILL BE ABLE TO GET THAT DONE

BEFORE THE ELECTION.

FLORIDA DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE

HEADING TOWARDS A TRIAL BEFORE

THE ELECTION --

>> Shannon: THAT'S THE FEDERAL

MAR-A-LAGO DOCUMENTS CASE.

>> SOMEONE LIKE ANDY AND OTHERS

WHO HAVE DEALT WITH CLASSIFIED

TRIALS, THAT IS NOT STRANGE.

THE FLORIDA SCHEDULE IS, IF

ANYTHING, MOVING AT A FAIRLY

GOOD CLIP.

IT OFTEN TAKES YEARS FOR THESE

CASES TO GET PUT TOGETHER WHEN

YOU HAVE THIS LEVEL OF

CLASSIFICATION.

THE IMPORTANT THING ABOUT THIS

CASE, YOU POINTED OUT BEFORE,

REMAINS THE OPTICS.

NEW YORK IS BEING VIEWED BY MANY

AS THIS VORTEX THAT WON'T LET

TRUMP OUT, THAT THEY KEEP ON

HITTING HIM.

AND THIS IS A MAJOR WIN FOR HIS

CRITICS.

BUT THE QUESTION IS WHETHER IT'S

A BIT OF A PYRRHIC VICTORY

BECAUSE OF ALL OF THE CASES,

THIS ONE EMBODIED THE

WEAPONIZATION OF THE LEGAL

SYSTEM.

SO THE RESULT WON'T COME AS A

SURPRISE.

FOR SOME, ADDING THE TITLE OF A

CONVICTED FELON COULD AFFECT

THEIR VOTES.

FOR OTHERS, IT COULD AFFECT IT

THE OTHER WAY.

FOR OTHERS, THEY ARE REPELLED BY

WHAT THEY SEE OUT OF NEW YORK.

I MUST TELL YOU, THE REASON I

WAS SADDENED THERE WAS NOT FOR

THE FORMER PRESIDENT.

IT WAS FOR THE NEW YORK LEGAL

SYSTEM.

I HAVE WRITTEN, AS MANY OF US

HAVE, THAT THIS IS A DEEPLY

FLAWED CASE.

IT'S WRONG.

AND THIS IS A GREAT LEGAL

SYSTEM.

I'M NOT A NEW YORK BAR MEMBER, I

AM OUT OF D.C., BUT I HAVE A

HUGE AMOUNT OF RESPECT FOR THIS

SYSTEM.

IT HAS HELPED DEFINE THE LAW IN

THIS COUNTRY, THE LEGAL HISTORY

WAS MADE HERE, ON THIS BLOCK,

AND LOOKING AT TWO COURT HOUSES,

WHERE LEGENDARY CASES WERE HEARD

AND HANDED DOWN.

IT'S PART OF OUR DNA AS LAWYERS,

SO FOR MANY OF US, IT IS A SAD

MOMENT, BECAUSE WE WERE HOPING

THIS JURY MIGHT REDEEM A BIT OF

THAT INTEGRITY.

IT DID NOT.

I AM NOT BLAMING THE JURORS.

THEY GOT INSTRUCTIONS THAT MADE

CONVICTION VERY LIKELY HERE.

I WAS ONE, AS OPPOSED TO MY GOOD

FRIEND ANDY, WHO BELIEVED THEY

WOULD GET A VERDICT TODAY AND IT

WOULD BE A CONVICTION, I WAS ONE

HOLDING OUT FOR A POSSIBLE HUNG

JURY BECAUSE I BELIEVE THIS JURY

WOULD SEE THROUGH THIS.

I'M NOT TOO SURE YOU CAN BLAME

THEM, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE

INSTRUCTIONS, WHEN YOU ALLOW A

JURY TO POTENTIALLY GO AND

DISAGREE ON WHAT HAPPENED AND

WHAT CRIME WAS BEING CONCEALED

HERE, IT MAKES IT PRETTY HARD TO

ACQUIT.

>> Shannon: JONATHAN, I WANT

TO ASK YOU TOO A LITTLE BIT

ABOUT THE FLAVOR INSIDE

BECAUSE YOU COMMENTED

YESTERDAY THAT THERE WERE, I

GUESS IT WAS TWO DAYS AGO DURING

THE SUMMATIONS, I WAS IN FOR THE

DEFENSE IN THE MORNING, YOU WERE

FOR THE PROSECUTION IN THE

AFTERNOON, YOU SAID WHEN IT

LOOKED LIKE THE PROSECUTOR WAS

MOCKING TRUMP OR LANDING POINTS

THAT WERE BAD FOR THE DEFENSE OR

BAD FOR TRUMP, THAT THE MEDIA IN

THE ROOM WAS REACTING TO THAT.

IT WASN'T EXACTLY NEUTRAL.

>> NO, HE KNEW HIS AUDIENCE.

THE MEDIA IN THE ROOM WAS

LAUGHING.

>> AND WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE

THERE JUST COVERING THIS AS

NEUTRAL ARBITERS.

>> I WAS SURPRISED.

THESE ARE JOURNALISTS I HOPE A

HIGHER REGARD THAN MYSELF

BECAUSE I AM JUST A COMMENTOR,

JUST SOMEONE WHO GIVES OPINION,

BUT NO, BUT EVERY ONE OF THOSE

DIGS LANDED WITH THAT AUDIENCE.

WE ALL EXPECTED THAT, THAT THERE

WOULD BE THIS HUMAN WAVE.

NOT JUST OF PEOPLE HERE ON THE

STREETS OF MANHATTAN, BUT I'M ON

THE LOT OF THE JOURNALISTS.

I THINK THAT WITH TIME, THEY

WILL SEE THE COST OF ALL OF

THIS.

WHAT HAPPENED IN THAT ROOM COMES

AT A COST.

IT COMES AT A COST OF THE RULE

OF LAW.

BUT THE ATMOSPHERE IN THE ROOM

AT THE END, I MUST SAY, WAS

SOLEMN AND IT WAS RIVETING.

NO ONE MOVED.

NOW IT WAS FUNNY BECAUSE THEY

REALLY RAMPED UP SECURITY RIGHT

BEFORE THE VERDICT CAME IN.

THE SECURITY SAID NOBODY MOVE,

NOBODY STAND, AND THERE IS A BIT

OF A CHUCKLE BECAUSE NO ONE WAS

MOVING.

>> Shannon: NOBODY IS GOING

ANYWHERE WHEN THAT VERDICT IS

COMING IN.

>> THE PERSON THAT SEEMED THE

CALL MUST WAS TRUMP.

HE CONTINUED TO TALK WITH HIS

COUNSEL.

THIS DID NOT SEEM TO SURPRISE

HIM IN THE LEAST.

AND I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY A

REACTION OF A LOT OF PEOPLE.

YOU BASICALLY GOT OUT OF THIS

TRIAL WHAT YOU THOUGHT YOU WOULD

GET.

FOR PEOPLE THAT VIEWED THIS AS A

POLITICAL TRIAL, IT IS THAT ON

STEROIDS.

FOR THOSE WHO BELIEVE THIS IS

LONG-DELAYED JUSTICE, THIS IS

EXACTLY WHAT THEY HOPED FOR.

BUT THAT FINAL VERDICT,

OF COURSE, WILL COME IN  

NOVEMBER.

>> Shannon: SO YOU ARE A VERY

EXPERIENCED DEFENSE ATTORNEY, TO

THE POINT WHERE IF I GET IN

TROUBLE, YOU ARE MY CALL.

I WANT YOU TO KNOW, FROM A

JAILHOUSE, JONATHAN TURLEY,

PLEASE TAKE MY CALL.

YOU KNOW IT IS LIKE TO BE ON THE

LOSING END OF A VERDICT.

BUT PRESIDENT TRUMP CAME OUT

TODAY AND REALLY FED INTO WHAT

HIS SUPPORTERS LOVE ABOUT HIM,

WE ARE GOING TO KEEP FIGHTING.

WE KNOW THAT IS A LONG PROCESS.

HOW THIS MAY REFLECT THE TRIAL

COURT DECISION ON THAT.

WHAT IS YOUR CONFIDENCE IN THE

APPELLATE DIVISION OR THE

APPELLATE PROCESS HERE IN

NEW YORK?

>> THIS CASE IS A LITTLE

DIFFERENT BECAUSE, QUITE

FRANKLY, I THINK THE LEVEL OF

REVERSIBLE ERROR HERE REALLY IS

QUITE CONSIDERABLE.

IT RUNS THE WATERFRONT OF

PROCEDURAL TO CONSTITUTIONAL

PROBLEMS, INCLUDING FEDERAL

CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS.

I DON'T EVEN SEE HOW YOU CAN

MEET THE UNANIMITY REQUIREMENT

IN THE WAY THAT THIS THING WAS

INSTRUCTED.

YEAH, THEY WERE UNANIMOUS THAT

SOME CRIME WAS COMMITTED ON THE

SECONDARY CRIME, BUT IT'S

APPARENTLY BETWEEN THE JURORS

AND GOD AS TO WHAT THAT CRIME

WAS, UNLESS THERE IS GOING TO BE

SOME RELEASE OF A JURY FORM.

WE HAVE NOT SEEN THAT JURY FORM.

>> Shannon: ANY INDICATION

WHEN YOU WERE INSIDE --

>> NO.

>> Shannon: THERE IS A SPECIAL

VERDICT FORM.

>> NO, WE WERE ALL HOPING THERE

MIGHT BE A FORM THAT WOULD BRING

CLARITY ON THAT ISSUE.

BUT NO, I THINK THAT, IN THE

END, WE WERE GOING TO HAVE A

REVERSAL.

I'M FAIRLY CONFIDENT OF THAT.

NOW IN THE NEW YORK APPELLATE

SYSTEM, THEY HAVE A RULE FOR

TRUMP.

THEY ARE VERY GOOD LAWYERS IN

THE NEW YORK SYSTEM, AND

CREDIBLE PEOPLE WHO WANT THE SYO

WORK THE WAY IT IS DESIGNED.

I AM ETERNALLY AN OPTIMIST.

I WAS AN OPTIMIST ABOUT A HUNG

JURY.

AND I'M AN OPTIMIST NOW ABOUT

THE APPELLATE JUDGES.

I THINK AT SOME POINT PEOPLE

WILL STEP FORWARD AND SAY

ENOUGH.

YOU KNOW, HATING THIS MAN IS NOT

ENOUGH TO FORGET THE LACK OF THE

EVIDENCE.

AND ONCE AGAIN, I DO NOT BLAME

THIS JURY.

THEY WERE GIVEN INSTRUCTIONS

THAT MADE IT VERY EASY TO

CONVICT.

AND SOME OF THEM MIGHT NOT HAVE

SEEN A REAL OPTION N