(05-07-2024 12:33 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: (05-07-2024 12:09 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote: (05-07-2024 11:31 AM)Redwingtom Wrote: (05-07-2024 11:19 AM)BigTigerMike Wrote: (05-07-2024 10:27 AM)The Sicatoka Wrote: Stephanie Clifford (aka Stormy Daniels) on the stand as a surprise witness today.
She seems "accelerated" and has to be told to slow down by the Court.
< your one-liner here >
Another indictment of this kangaroo court is the judge allowing prosecutors to call any witness they like without a witness list order so the defense can prepare themselves.
What witnesses have been called that were not on the witness list provided to the defense?
There are no witness lists in this case but it should. The list is in order on who they will call next 1…2….3….4 etc
Source?
Meanwhile....
Quote:donald trump’s prosecutors are keeping their witness schedule secret in order to stop the former president from targeting upcoming witnesses in his New York criminal hush money trial, they said Monday.
“The defendant has been violating the order restricting extrajudicial speech, and we did not want to have the witnesses’ names, the next witnesses’ names out there,” prosecutor Joshua Steinglass told the judge in Manhattan Supreme Court.
To avoid the names being “out there,” the prosecution is notifying defense attorneys who the next witnesses are one day before they are called to testify, Steinglass said.
The District Attorney’s office has not released an expected witness list to the public.
trump prosecutors keep witness schedule secret to avoid ex-president’s attacks
Seems to me that you have answered your own question.
In what SOUNDS to me like an unusual event, the prosecution is only giving a day's notice on whom will be testifying.
Ignoring the idea that there is a presumption of 'attack'...
I mean, if a witness list were available to the Trump team, regardless of 'when' or even 'if' they might be called, they would be known by Trump and if he wanted to attack them, he could.... so it makes no sense that you would allow them to know weeks in advance (as they normally do) whom might be called so that they could prepare... and then seek to 'protect' them from 'attack' by not giving advanced notice of precisely when they might testify? That honestly protects nobody from attack... so the only way this protects them from attack is if Trump's team doesn't know who will be called AT ALL until just before... and that SOUNDS like a clear violation of any trial I've ever heard of.
A gag order where he can't talk about witnesses would be more effective, but that runs against the idea that the other side can apparently talk about him, but he can't defend himself in response. Especially during an election cycle, that seems highly contrived.
I mean seriously... right or wrong... can you imagine if one candidate were allowed to attack the other but the other was legally barred from doing the same?
That makes no sense on any level, regardless of the participants