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

Fox News
30 May 202411:33

Summary

TLDRProfessor Jonathan Turley shares his observations from the courtroom where former President Trump's organization was found guilty on multiple charges. He describes the verdict as legally unfounded and predicts an appeal process that could reverse the decision due to numerous reversible errors, including procedural and constitutional issues. Turley also discusses the media's reaction during the trial and the potential impact on public opinion leading up to the November elections.

Takeaways

  • ๐Ÿ“š Professor Jonathan Turley, a legal expert, provided insights from inside the courtroom where former President Trump's case was being heard.
  • ๐ŸŽญ There was a dramatic moment in court when the judge initially dismissed the jury due to an inability to reach a verdict, only to correct the mistake and announce that a verdict had been reached.
  • ๐Ÿ˜ Former President Trump did not show any visible reaction to the verdict being read, and continued to chat with his counsel.
  • ๐Ÿ‘ฅ The courtroom atmosphere was tense, with a mix of emotions among the attendees, ranging from those thrilled by the guilty verdict to those who were saddened by it.
  • ๐Ÿšซ Turley expressed his disagreement with the verdict, stating that he believes the case was legally unfounded and that it embodies the controversial Trump era.
  • ๐Ÿค” There is uncertainty about the specifics of the guilty verdicts, as the jury was allowed to find guilt on any one of three secondary crimes without clear communication of which were implicated.
  • ๐Ÿ”„ Turley anticipates that the case will be appealed and suggests that it may be reversed in either state or federal systems due to what he sees as reversible problems in the case.
  • ๐Ÿ› The discussion also touched on other legal challenges faced by Trump, including cases in New York and the potential impact of an upcoming Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity.
  • ๐Ÿ—ณ๏ธ The final verdict on Trump's legal standing may not come before the November elections, which is a significant political event.
  • ๐Ÿ“‰ Turley lamented what he perceives as the weaponization of the legal system against Trump, suggesting that this case could be seen as a Pyrrhic victory for critics due to the questionable legal foundation.
  • ๐Ÿ‘ฎโ€โ™‚๏ธ The media's reaction inside the courtroom was noted to be non-neutral, with laughter at points during the prosecutor's summation, which Turley found concerning.

Q & A

  • What was the initial reaction of President Trump and his team when they thought the court was going to break for the day?

    -President Trump and his team seemed to relax, with Trump even smiling, possibly thinking that the jury was still struggling and would not be able to reach a verdict that day.

  • What did Professor Jonathan Turley describe as 'one of the most bizarre moments' in the courtroom?

    -The moment when the judge initially said that the jury could not reach a decision and then corrected himself, announcing that a verdict had been reached, causing a sudden shift in the courtroom atmosphere.

  • How did Professor Turley describe the mood in the courtroom after the verdict was announced?

    -He described it as a moment of high pressure, with people showing clear reactions of either thrill or sadness depending on their stance on the case.

  • What was Professor Turley's opinion on the case's legal foundation?

    -Professor Turley disagreed with the verdict, stating that he believes the case was legally unfounded.

  • What was unclear about the guilty verdicts that were read out?

    -It was unclear which of the three secondary crimes the former president was found guilty of, as the jury was allowed to find guilt on any one of them.

  • What did Professor Turley predict about the future of this case?

    -He predicted that the case would go up on appeal and that it would likely be reversed in either the state or federal systems due to what he sees as reversible problems in the case.

  • What other cases involving the former president are mentioned in the script?

    -Other cases mentioned include two federal cases pending a Supreme Court decision on immunity and a personal case involving E. Jean Carroll.

  • What is the significance of the Supreme Court's upcoming decision on immunity?

    -The decision could have implications for the pending cases against the former president, potentially affecting whether they can proceed before the election.

  • What was Professor Turley's view on the impact of the verdict on the legal system?

    -He expressed sadness over the verdict, viewing it as a reflection of the weaponization of the legal system and a cost to the rule of law.

  • How did the media in the courtroom react to the prosecutor's statements during the trial?

    -The media in the courtroom was observed laughing at the prosecutor's digs against Trump, which Professor Turley found surprising and concerning given their role as neutral arbiters.

  • What was the atmosphere like in the courtroom when the verdict was announced?

    -The atmosphere was described as solemn and riveting, with everyone in the room remaining still and focused on the verdict.

  • What does Professor Turley believe about the chances of the verdict being overturned on appeal?

    -Professor Turley is fairly confident that the verdict will be overturned on appeal due to what he sees as considerable reversible errors, including procedural and constitutional problems.

Outlines

00:00

๐Ÿ“Š Courtroom Tension and Verdict Surprise

In this segment, Professor Jonathan Turley shares his experience from the courtroom where former President Trump's team seemed relaxed, believing the jury was struggling. However, a sudden verdict was announced, causing a shift in the atmosphere. Turley describes the scene as one of the most bizarre moments he has witnessed. The former president did not show any emotion as the guilty verdicts were read out. Turley expresses his disagreement with the verdict, stating that he believes the case was legally unfounded and that the jury's decision on the secondary crimes is unclear. He anticipates that the case will be appealed and possibly reversed in higher courts, emphasizing the importance of the rule of law in the country.

05:01

๐Ÿ› Reflections on Legal System and Public Perception

Professor Turley discusses the broader implications of the case, suggesting that it may be seen as a weaponization of the legal system against Trump. He expresses sadness over the verdict, not for the former president, but for the New York legal system, which he believes has been deeply flawed in this case. Turley criticizes the instructions given to the jury, which he believes made conviction very likely. He also comments on the media's reaction during the trial, noting that journalists were not neutral and were laughing at points that were critical of Trump. Turley predicts that the final verdict on the case will come in November, hinting at the political nature of the trial.

10:01

๐Ÿ›๏ธ Appellate Confidence and Legal Analysis

In this segment, Turley, as an experienced defense attorney, discusses the potential for the case to be reversed on appeal due to what he perceives as considerable reversible errors, including procedural and constitutional problems. He questions the unanimity requirement given the instructions to the jury and the lack of clarity on which secondary crime was found guilty. Turley expresses confidence in the appellate judges and hopes that they will recognize the lack of evidence and correct the situation. He reiterates that he does not blame the jury, as they were given instructions that made conviction easy.

Mindmap

Keywords

๐Ÿ’กVerdict

A verdict is the formal finding of a jury on the issues or questions presented to them for decision in a trial. In the context of the video, the term is central as it discusses the outcome of a trial where the jury has delivered a verdict of guilty. The script mentions the moment the verdict was read, creating a pivotal and tense atmosphere in the courtroom.

๐Ÿ’กPresident Trump

President Trump refers to the former President of the United States, Donald Trump. The script discusses his presence and demeanor during the trial and the impact of the verdict on him. His reaction to the verdict and the implications for his political future are significant aspects of the video's narrative.

๐Ÿ’กAppeal

An appeal is a legal procedure by which a case is brought from a lower court to a higher court for a new trial or reconsideration of the decision. The script mentions the possibility of the case going up on appeal, indicating that the legal process is not yet concluded and that there may be further developments in the legal battle.

๐Ÿ’กJury

A jury is a group of people sworn to render a verdict in a trial, based on evidence presented. The script describes the jury's role in reaching a decision and the pressure they faced. The jury's decision is a key element in the video's discussion of the trial's outcome.

๐Ÿ’กProsecutor

A prosecutor is a legal representative of the prosecution in a criminal trial, responsible for presenting the case against the defendant. The script refers to the prosecutor's performance during the trial, including their interactions with the media and the impact of their arguments on the jury.

๐Ÿ’กDefense

In a legal context, the defense refers to the party or attorney representing the person accused of a crime, who presents a case to counter the prosecution's charges. The script discusses the defense's perspective, their arguments, and their reaction to the verdict.

๐Ÿ’กLegal System

The legal system encompasses the set of institutions and processes by which laws are enacted and enforced. The script discusses the role of the legal system in the trial, with references to the rule of law and the potential for the case to be reviewed by higher courts.

๐Ÿ’กRule of Law

The rule of law is the principle that law should govern a nation, as opposed to being ruled by individuals or arbitrary decisions. The script emphasizes the importance of the rule of law in the context of the trial and the appeal process, highlighting the belief in a fair and just legal system.

๐Ÿ’กGuilty Verdict

A guilty verdict is the decision of a jury or judge that the defendant in a criminal trial is guilty of the crime charged. The script repeatedly mentions the guilty verdict, which is the crux of the trial's outcome and has significant implications for the parties involved.

๐Ÿ’กMistrial

A mistrial is a trial that has been rendered invalid due to a procedural error, misconduct, or other issues that prevent a fair trial. The script refers to the possibility of a hung jury, which is a type of mistrial where the jury cannot reach a unanimous verdict.

๐Ÿ’กWeaponization of the Legal System

The term 'weaponization of the legal system' refers to the use of legal processes as a tool to achieve objectives outside the scope of justice, often for political purposes. The script discusses the perception that the legal system has been used in such a manner in relation to the case involving President Trump.

Highlights

Professor Jonathan Turley shares his experience from the courtroom during the verdict announcement.

Turley describes the moment as one of the most bizarre he has experienced in a courtroom.

Judge initially dismisses the court for the day, then corrects himself after receiving a verdict note.

Building pressure in the courtroom is palpable, but the former president shows no emotion.

Turley expresses his disagreement with the verdict, stating the case was legally unfounded.

The jury's decision on guilt was based on any one of three secondary crimes, leaving ambiguity.

Turley anticipates the case will be reversed on appeal due to reversible problems.

He emphasizes the importance of the rule of law and the country's commitment to it.

Turley discusses other cases against Trump, including the E. Jean Carroll case.

The Supreme Court's upcoming decision on presidential immunity is critical.

Turley believes the Supreme Court will likely avoid extremes and find a middle ground.

He comments on the optics of the legal system in New York and its impact on public perception.

Turley laments the potential weaponization of the legal system as seen in this case.

He shares his sadness over the verdict and the implications for the New York legal system.

Turley observes the media's reaction in the courtroom, noting a lack of neutrality.

He predicts a reversal in the appellate process due to considerable reversible errors.

Turley is confident in the appellate judges and the system's ability to correct the situation.

Transcripts

00:00

E

00:00

SEEN IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS.

00:04

>> Shannon: ALL RIGHT, JUDGE,

00:06

I WANT TO BRING IN

00:07

PROFESSOR JONATHAN TURLEY, WHO

00:08

HAS BEEN IN THE COURTROOM TODAY.

00:10

SO YOU ARE FRESH OUT OF THERE.

00:11

CAN YOU GIVE US ANY OF THE

00:12

FLAVOR?

00:13

BECAUSE WHEN WE THOUGHT THE

00:14

COURT WAS GOING TO BREAK FOR THE

00:15

DAY, IT SEEMS LIKE

00:16

PRESIDENT TRUMP AND HIS TEAM

00:17

SEEMED TO RELAX, THAT HE WAS

00:19

SMILING.

00:19

MAYBE THEY THOUGHT, OKAY, THIS

00:20

JURY IS GOING TO STILL

00:23

STRUGGLING, GOING TO LEAVE

00:25

TONIGHT NOT DIGGING IT TO SAY AN

00:25

WE GET WORD THAT THE VERDICT IS

00:27

COMING IN.

00:27

CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT THE MOOD

00:29

IN THE COURTHOUSE?

00:30

>> IT WAS ONE OF THE MOST

00:31

BIZARRE MOMENTS I HAVE HAD IN A

00:34

COURTROOM, AND I WAS JUST

00:35

OBSERVING.

00:35

THE JUDGE HAD JUST SAID THAT THE

00:36

JURY COULD NOT REACH A DECISION.

00:39

AND THAT WE WOULD BE DISMISSED

00:41

FOR THE DAY.

00:42

SOME REPORTERS ACTUALLY GATHERED

00:43

THEIR STUFF AND WERE STARTING TO

00:45

LEAVE.

00:46

AND THEN THE JUDGE CAME AND

00:48

BASICALLY SAID, MY MISTAKE.

00:50

WE JUST GOT A NOTE SAYING

00:51

THERE'S A VERDICT.

00:54

THROUGHOUT THIS TIME, YOU COULD

00:55

FEEL THE BUILDING PRESSURE IN

00:57

THAT COURTROOM.

00:58

THE ONE PERSON THAT DIDN'T SEEM

01:00

TO REGISTER IT WAS THE FORMER

01:03

PRESIDENT.

01:03

HE HAD BEEN CHATTING WITH

01:05

COUNSEL.

01:05

HE DIDN'T SHOW ANY EMOTION AT

01:07

ALL.

01:10

AS THIS MANTRA OF GUILTY VERDICT

01:13

OF GUILTY VERDICT WAS READ AND

01:15

THERE WAS A GREAT, I THINK THIS

01:16

IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT

01:21

REALLY EMBODIES THE ENTIRE TRUMP

01:22

ERA.

01:23

THERE WERE PEOPLE WHO CLEARLY

01:25

WERE THRILLED BY THE RESULT.

01:27

AND THERE WERE PEOPLE THAT WILL

01:28

BE VERY SAD BY IT.

01:30

I WAS SADDENED TO WATCH IT.

01:31

I DISAGREE WITH THIS VERDICT.

01:33

I THINK, AS I HAVE SAID BEFORE,

01:34

THAT THIS CASE WAS LEGALLY

01:39

UNFOUNDED.

01:40

WHEN THEY WERE READING THOSE

01:41

GUILTY VERDICTS, THE ONE THING

01:43

THAT WE DIDN'T KNOW IS REALLY

01:45

WHAT HE WAS FOUND GUILTY OF,

01:49

BECAUSE IF YOU REMEMBER, THE

01:50

JUDGE ALLOWED THE JURY TO FIND

01:53

GUILT ON ANY 1 OF 3 SECONDARY

01:57

CRIMES.

01:58

WE WEREN'T TOLD WHETHER THE JURY

02:01

FOUND ANY ONE OF THOSE CRIMES,

02:02

WHETHER THEY FOUND ALL THREE OF

02:04

THOSE CRIMES.

02:05

I'M NOT TOO SURE WE WILL KNOW

02:07

THAT.

02:07

THAT'S ONE OF THE MANY ISSUES

02:10

THAT I THINK PRESENTS REVERSIBLE

02:12

PROBLEMS IN THIS CASE.

02:13

SO WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT THIS

02:17

IS A HISTORIC MOMENT.

02:17

WE ALL HAVE TO TAKE A BREATH.

02:19

BUT FOR THOSE UPSET BY THIS

02:22

VERDICT, REMEMBER, THIS REMAINS

02:23

A COUNTRY COMMITTED TO THE RULE

02:25

OF LAW.

02:26

AND THIS IS GOING TO GO UP ON

02:28

APPEAL.

02:28

I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE

02:29

REVERSED IN THE STATE OR FEDERAL

02:31

SYSTEMS.

02:32

BUT IT'S MOMENTS LIKE THIS, WHEN

02:34

YOU ARE ON THE OTHER SIDE, WHEN

02:36

YOU DISAGREE WITH A VERDICT,

02:37

THAT YOU HAVE TO TAKE A LEAP OF

02:39

FAITH IN THE RULE OF LAW.

02:41

IT'S WHAT DEFINES US.

02:42

MANY PEOPLE FEEL THAT THIS CASE

02:46

REALLY EMBODIED THE ANTITHESIS

02:47

OF THAT.

02:48

BUT AS A COUNTRY AS A WHOLE, WE

02:49

HAVE A SYSTEM IN PLACE TO REVIEW

02:52

THIS.

02:52

FOR DONALD TRUMP, THAT'S NOT

02:53

GOING TO HAPPEN BEFORE THE

02:55

ELECTION, IN ALL LIKELIHOOD.

02:58

BUT LET'S KEEP IN MIND THAT THIS

03:00

IS NOT THE ONLY COURT.

03:01

IT'S JUST THE FIRST ONE.

03:03

>> Shannon: WELL, AND THERE

03:04

HAVE ALSO BEEN JURY TRIALS AND

03:07

JUDGES AND DECISIONS THAT HAVE

03:08

BEEN MADE THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN

03:10

TOUGH FOR THE FORMER PRESIDENT

03:11

AND OTHER CONTACTS, TOO, IN THE

03:14

BUSINESS CONTEXT AND A PERSONAL

03:15

CASE INVOLVING E. JEAN CARROLL.

03:16

THERE ARE OTHER DECISIONS MADE

03:17

AGAINST HIM THAT HAVE BEEN VERY

03:18

DIFFICULT.

03:19

THEY'VE BEEN IN NEW YORK.

03:20

WHAT DO YOU THINK THAT PORTENDS

03:22

OR DOES NOT WITH THESE OTHER

03:24

CASES WE HAVE PENDING?

03:24

GEORGE IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT

03:26

IS GOING TO GET TO TRIAL BEFORE

03:29

WE GET TO NOVEMBER.

03:31

THE TWO FEDERAL CASES, WE ARE

03:32

WAITING FOR THE SUPREME COURT

03:33

DECISION ON IMMUNITY THAT COULD

03:34

COME AS EARLY AS NEXT THURSDAY,

03:35

WE GET OPINION AGAIN.

03:37

WHAT WILL THAT CASE MEAN TO ALL

03:39

OF THESE THINGS THAT ARE PENDING

03:41

OR HAVE ALREADY BEEN DECIDED

03:43

WHEN IT COMES TO THIS QUESTION,

03:45

YOU KNOW, WE HEARD THE

03:46

ARGUMENTS, THE SUPREME COURT,

03:47

THERE WERE TWO EXTREMES.

03:48

EVERYTHING AT ANYTHING THE

03:48

PRESIDENT DOES, YOU CAN'T

03:49

QUESTION ANY OF IT, THERE MUST

03:51

BE FULL IMMUNITY FROM ANY KIND

03:53

OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY.

03:54

SO THERE IS NOTHING, NO

03:55

PROTECTION FOR HIM.

03:56

WE KNOW THE JUSTICES ARE GOING

03:58

TO LAND, WE THINK, SOMEWHERE IN

03:59

BETWEEN, NOT WITH THOSE EXTREMEW

04:03

IS THAT DECISION AS WE WAIT FOR

04:04

THAT?

04:05

>> IT IS VERY CRITICAL BOTH IN

04:07

TERMS OF THE LAW AND THE TIMING.

04:08

THE COURT DID SEEM TO REJECT THE

04:10

EXTREMES ON BOTH SIDES.

04:11

THEY DIDN'T LIKE THE EXTREMES OF

04:14

THE TRUMP TEAM IN TERMS OF THE

04:17

SWEEPING IMMUNITY, BUT THEY ALSO

04:18

DIDN'T LIKE THE COURT OF APPEALS

04:19

APPROACH.

04:19

THEY FELT THAT IT GAVE TOO

04:20

LITTLE RECOGNITION OF THE NEEDS

04:23

OF THE OFFICE.

04:23

SO THEY COULD END UP SENDING

04:27

THIS BACK FOR FURTHER EVIDENCE

04:29

AND FOR DETERMINATIONS BY THE

04:31

TRIAL COURT.

04:31

IT SEEMS UNLIKELY THAT THE JUDGE

04:32

WILL BE ABLE TO GET THAT DONE

04:34

BEFORE THE ELECTION.

04:36

FLORIDA DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE

04:38

HEADING TOWARDS A TRIAL BEFORE

04:39

THE ELECTION --

04:40

>> Shannon: THAT'S THE FEDERAL

04:42

MAR-A-LAGO DOCUMENTS CASE.

04:43

>> SOMEONE LIKE ANDY AND OTHERS

04:45

WHO HAVE DEALT WITH CLASSIFIED

04:46

TRIALS, THAT IS NOT STRANGE.

04:48

THE FLORIDA SCHEDULE IS, IF

04:50

ANYTHING, MOVING AT A FAIRLY

04:51

GOOD CLIP.

04:54

IT OFTEN TAKES YEARS FOR THESE

04:55

CASES TO GET PUT TOGETHER WHEN

04:58

YOU HAVE THIS LEVEL OF

04:59

CLASSIFICATION.

05:01

THE IMPORTANT THING ABOUT THIS

05:02

CASE, YOU POINTED OUT BEFORE,

05:05

REMAINS THE OPTICS.

05:06

NEW YORK IS BEING VIEWED BY MANY

05:08

AS THIS VORTEX THAT WON'T LET

05:10

TRUMP OUT, THAT THEY KEEP ON

05:11

HITTING HIM.

05:13

AND THIS IS A MAJOR WIN FOR HIS

05:15

CRITICS.

05:16

BUT THE QUESTION IS WHETHER IT'S

05:17

A BIT OF A PYRRHIC VICTORY

05:23

BECAUSE OF ALL OF THE CASES,

05:25

THIS ONE EMBODIED THE

05:25

WEAPONIZATION OF THE LEGAL

05:27

SYSTEM.

05:27

SO THE RESULT WON'T COME AS A

05:30

SURPRISE.

05:32

FOR SOME, ADDING THE TITLE OF A

05:34

CONVICTED FELON COULD AFFECT

05:35

THEIR VOTES.

05:36

FOR OTHERS, IT COULD AFFECT IT

05:37

THE OTHER WAY.

05:39

FOR OTHERS, THEY ARE REPELLED BY

05:41

WHAT THEY SEE OUT OF NEW YORK.

05:42

I MUST TELL YOU, THE REASON I

05:43

WAS SADDENED THERE WAS NOT FOR

05:45

THE FORMER PRESIDENT.

05:49

IT WAS FOR THE NEW YORK LEGAL

05:50

SYSTEM.

05:51

I HAVE WRITTEN, AS MANY OF US

05:52

HAVE, THAT THIS IS A DEEPLY

05:53

FLAWED CASE.

05:55

IT'S WRONG.

05:57

AND THIS IS A GREAT LEGAL

05:58

SYSTEM.

05:59

I'M NOT A NEW YORK BAR MEMBER, I

06:01

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

06:02

HUGE AMOUNT OF RESPECT FOR THIS

06:03

SYSTEM.

06:05

IT HAS HELPED DEFINE THE LAW IN

06:07

THIS COUNTRY, THE LEGAL HISTORY

06:09

WAS MADE HERE, ON THIS BLOCK,

06:11

AND LOOKING AT TWO COURT HOUSES,

06:15

WHERE LEGENDARY CASES WERE HEARD

06:16

AND HANDED DOWN.

06:17

IT'S PART OF OUR DNA AS LAWYERS,

06:19

SO FOR MANY OF US, IT IS A SAD

06:22

MOMENT, BECAUSE WE WERE HOPING

06:23

THIS JURY MIGHT REDEEM A BIT OF

06:25

THAT INTEGRITY.

06:26

IT DID NOT.

06:27

I AM NOT BLAMING THE JURORS.

06:28

THEY GOT INSTRUCTIONS THAT MADE

06:33

CONVICTION VERY LIKELY HERE.

06:37

I WAS ONE, AS OPPOSED TO MY GOOD

06:38

FRIEND ANDY, WHO BELIEVED THEY

06:40

WOULD GET A VERDICT TODAY AND IT

06:41

WOULD BE A CONVICTION, I WAS ONE

06:45

HOLDING OUT FOR A POSSIBLE HUNG

06:47

JURY BECAUSE I BELIEVE THIS JURY

06:50

WOULD SEE THROUGH THIS.

06:51

I'M NOT TOO SURE YOU CAN BLAME

06:53

THEM, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE

06:56

INSTRUCTIONS, WHEN YOU ALLOW A

06:59

JURY TO POTENTIALLY GO AND

07:02

DISAGREE ON WHAT HAPPENED AND

07:03

WHAT CRIME WAS BEING CONCEALED

07:06

HERE, IT MAKES IT PRETTY HARD TO

07:09

ACQUIT.

07:09

>> Shannon: JONATHAN, I WANT

07:10

TO ASK YOU TOO A LITTLE BIT

07:12

ABOUT THE FLAVOR INSIDE

07:14

BECAUSE YOU COMMENTED

07:15

YESTERDAY THAT THERE WERE, I

07:17

GUESS IT WAS TWO DAYS AGO DURING

07:18

THE SUMMATIONS, I WAS IN FOR THE

07:20

DEFENSE IN THE MORNING, YOU WERE

07:22

FOR THE PROSECUTION IN THE

07:23

AFTERNOON, YOU SAID WHEN IT

07:24

LOOKED LIKE THE PROSECUTOR WAS

07:27

MOCKING TRUMP OR LANDING POINTS

07:27

THAT WERE BAD FOR THE DEFENSE OR

07:28

BAD FOR TRUMP, THAT THE MEDIA IN

07:31

THE ROOM WAS REACTING TO THAT.

07:34

IT WASN'T EXACTLY NEUTRAL.

07:35

>> NO, HE KNEW HIS AUDIENCE.

07:38

THE MEDIA IN THE ROOM WAS

07:39

LAUGHING.

07:39

>> AND WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE

07:41

THERE JUST COVERING THIS AS

07:43

NEUTRAL ARBITERS.

07:44

>> I WAS SURPRISED.

07:46

THESE ARE JOURNALISTS I HOPE A

07:47

HIGHER REGARD THAN MYSELF

07:48

BECAUSE I AM JUST A COMMENTOR,

07:51

JUST SOMEONE WHO GIVES OPINION,

07:52

BUT NO, BUT EVERY ONE OF THOSE

07:54

DIGS LANDED WITH THAT AUDIENCE.

07:55

WE ALL EXPECTED THAT, THAT THERE

07:58

WOULD BE THIS HUMAN WAVE.

08:00

NOT JUST OF PEOPLE HERE ON THE

08:00

STREETS OF MANHATTAN, BUT I'M ON

08:02

THE LOT OF THE JOURNALISTS.

08:03

I THINK THAT WITH TIME, THEY

08:06

WILL SEE THE COST OF ALL OF

08:07

THIS.

08:08

WHAT HAPPENED IN THAT ROOM COMES

08:09

AT A COST.

08:09

IT COMES AT A COST OF THE RULE

08:12

OF LAW.

08:14

BUT THE ATMOSPHERE IN THE ROOM

08:14

AT THE END, I MUST SAY, WAS

08:18

SOLEMN AND IT WAS RIVETING.

08:21

NO ONE MOVED.

08:22

NOW IT WAS FUNNY BECAUSE THEY

08:23

REALLY RAMPED UP SECURITY RIGHT

08:24

BEFORE THE VERDICT CAME IN.

08:28

THE SECURITY SAID NOBODY MOVE,

08:30

NOBODY STAND, AND THERE IS A BIT

08:31

OF A CHUCKLE BECAUSE NO ONE WAS

08:33

MOVING.

08:34

>> Shannon: NOBODY IS GOING

08:34

ANYWHERE WHEN THAT VERDICT IS

08:35

COMING IN.

08:37

>> THE PERSON THAT SEEMED THE

08:41

CALL MUST WAS TRUMP.

08:43

HE CONTINUED TO TALK WITH HIS

08:45

COUNSEL.

08:45

THIS DID NOT SEEM TO SURPRISE

08:47

HIM IN THE LEAST.

08:50

AND I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY A

08:51

REACTION OF A LOT OF PEOPLE.

08:53

YOU BASICALLY GOT OUT OF THIS

08:56

TRIAL WHAT YOU THOUGHT YOU WOULD

08:57

GET.

08:58

FOR PEOPLE THAT VIEWED THIS AS A

09:00

POLITICAL TRIAL, IT IS THAT ON

09:02

STEROIDS.

09:03

FOR THOSE WHO BELIEVE THIS IS

09:05

LONG-DELAYED JUSTICE, THIS IS

09:08

EXACTLY WHAT THEY HOPED FOR.

09:09

BUT THAT FINAL VERDICT,

09:11

OF COURSE, WILL COME IN ย 

09:14

NOVEMBER.

09:14

>> Shannon: SO YOU ARE A VERY

09:15

EXPERIENCED DEFENSE ATTORNEY, TO

09:16

THE POINT WHERE IF I GET IN

09:17

TROUBLE, YOU ARE MY CALL.

09:18

I WANT YOU TO KNOW, FROM A

09:21

JAILHOUSE, JONATHAN TURLEY,

09:22

PLEASE TAKE MY CALL.

09:25

YOU KNOW IT IS LIKE TO BE ON THE

09:26

LOSING END OF A VERDICT.

09:29

BUT PRESIDENT TRUMP CAME OUT

09:29

TODAY AND REALLY FED INTO WHAT

09:31

HIS SUPPORTERS LOVE ABOUT HIM,

09:33

WE ARE GOING TO KEEP FIGHTING.

09:35

WE KNOW THAT IS A LONG PROCESS.

09:41

HOW THIS MAY REFLECT THE TRIAL

09:43

COURT DECISION ON THAT.

09:43

WHAT IS YOUR CONFIDENCE IN THE

09:47

APPELLATE DIVISION OR THE

09:49

APPELLATE PROCESS HERE IN

09:49

NEW YORK?

09:50

>> THIS CASE IS A LITTLE

09:52

DIFFERENT BECAUSE, QUITE

09:53

FRANKLY, I THINK THE LEVEL OF

09:55

REVERSIBLE ERROR HERE REALLY IS

09:57

QUITE CONSIDERABLE.

09:59

IT RUNS THE WATERFRONT OF

10:01

PROCEDURAL TO CONSTITUTIONAL

10:04

PROBLEMS, INCLUDING FEDERAL

10:05

CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS.

10:05

I DON'T EVEN SEE HOW YOU CAN

10:07

MEET THE UNANIMITY REQUIREMENT

10:11

IN THE WAY THAT THIS THING WAS

10:12

INSTRUCTED.

10:14

YEAH, THEY WERE UNANIMOUS THAT

10:15

SOME CRIME WAS COMMITTED ON THE

10:16

SECONDARY CRIME, BUT IT'S

10:18

APPARENTLY BETWEEN THE JURORS

10:20

AND GOD AS TO WHAT THAT CRIME

10:21

WAS, UNLESS THERE IS GOING TO BE

10:23

SOME RELEASE OF A JURY FORM.

10:25

WE HAVE NOT SEEN THAT JURY FORM.

10:27

>> Shannon: ANY INDICATION

10:29

WHEN YOU WERE INSIDE --

10:29

>> NO.

10:30

>> Shannon: THERE IS A SPECIAL

10:32

VERDICT FORM.

10:32

>> NO, WE WERE ALL HOPING THERE

10:33

MIGHT BE A FORM THAT WOULD BRING

10:35

CLARITY ON THAT ISSUE.

10:37

BUT NO, I THINK THAT, IN THE

10:39

END, WE WERE GOING TO HAVE A

10:41

REVERSAL.

10:42

I'M FAIRLY CONFIDENT OF THAT.

10:43

NOW IN THE NEW YORK APPELLATE

10:45

SYSTEM, THEY HAVE A RULE FOR

10:47

TRUMP.

10:47

THEY ARE VERY GOOD LAWYERS IN

10:48

THE NEW YORK SYSTEM, AND

10:50

CREDIBLE PEOPLE WHO WANT THE SYO

10:53

WORK THE WAY IT IS DESIGNED.

10:54

I AM ETERNALLY AN OPTIMIST.

10:56

I WAS AN OPTIMIST ABOUT A HUNG

10:58

JURY.

10:58

AND I'M AN OPTIMIST NOW ABOUT

11:01

THE APPELLATE JUDGES.

11:03

I THINK AT SOME POINT PEOPLE

11:05

WILL STEP FORWARD AND SAY

11:05

ENOUGH.

11:07

YOU KNOW, HATING THIS MAN IS NOT

11:09

ENOUGH TO FORGET THE LACK OF THE

11:11

EVIDENCE.

11:12

AND ONCE AGAIN, I DO NOT BLAME

11:14

THIS JURY.

11:15

THEY WERE GIVEN INSTRUCTIONS

11:17

THAT MADE IT VERY EASY TO

11:21

CONVICT.

11:21

AND SOME OF THEM MIGHT NOT HAVE

11:22

SEEN A REAL OPTION N