The evidence of adult film star Stormy Daniels, whose alleged sexual encounter with Mr Trump is at the heart of the case, could be one reason.
“The level of detail that was provided [by Ms Daniels] is really not necessary to the telling of the story,” said Anna Cominsky, a professor at New York Law School.
“On the one hand, her detail makes her credible and as a prosecutor, you want to provide enough detail so the jury believes what she has to say. On the other hand, there’s a line, where it could become irrelevant and prejudicial.”
Mr Trump’s defence team twice called for a mistrial during Ms Daniels’ testimony, motions that were denied by the judge.
Beyond that, the novel legal strategy taken by the District Attorney in this case may also provide grounds for appeal.
Falsifying business records can be a lower-level misdemeanour in New York, but Mr Trump faces more serious felony charges because of a supposed second crime, an alleged illegal attempt to influence the 2016 election.
Some legal experts say the lack of clarity over which specific law may have been broken could give the defence an opening to challenge the conviction.
Source link
