Ignorance Thrives In The Dark…And In The Light

The criminal trial of former President Donald Trump is getting 24-hour media coverage, but much of the case is happening in the dark, with peculiarities of the court’s procedures making critical aspects of the case opaque.

w/@kyledcheney https://t.co/a3jCkOKvPx

— erica orden (@eorden) April 21, 2024

What is a “Motion to Show Cause”? A “Motion in Limine”? A Sandoval hearing?

Unless you are a litigator in New York, specifically a criminal defense lawyer or prosecutor, you can’t answer all three of those questions. Specifically a litigator. Michael Cohen was never a trial lawyer, but he recently complained about the judge possibly imposing a $1000 fine per count of contempt on Trump. Far too low a figure, Cohen complained, and he criticized the judge for not understanding that. Turns out it’s the statutory licit for contempt. Litigates know that; non-litigators don’t. And the general public, which includes reporters?

Aspects of any trial are already opaque, and even journalists who are lawyers don’t enlighten every corner. I’ve seen former prosecutors on cable and Twitter spout absolute nonsense (don’t get me started on the law professors). The smart ones are calm and circumspect, knowing the complexities of any situation, and the lack of knowledge they have about the particularities. The rest are braying asses anxious to be called back, or just blinkered by their own biases. 

I caught Tim Parlatore on Ari Melber’s show trying to explain why Bragg doesn’t have a case because Michael Cohen is a witness and the defense will flay him for his lies, so game over. It was such a weak argument I couldn’t believe someone would be that stupid. And then I found out it was Parlatore speaking, and all became clear.

The Politico argument does report that much if the obscure nature off proceedings is due to Trump’s lawyers filing so many motions, Merchan had to staunch the flow of them. The opaqueness, IOW, on that point is because a judge is trying to control his docket and swat away the storm of flies the Lord of the Flies is stirring up.

Politico also complains that the New York court dockets are not on-line. emptywheel frequently tweets about the Florida docket. She usually reproduces the days docket entries as they appear. And I can’t make heads or tails of them. Knowing she’s not a lawyer, I don’t often try to. During jury selection, one former DOJ prosecutor talked about his experience picking juries in Federal court in the Eastern district of Virginia, where he said it usually took 40 minutes because the judge asked all the questions. All last week “experts” railed against Merchan’s procedure. When the jury was selected by Friday, he won universal acclaim. Was the press transparent about how many idiots they platformed in a week?

Similarly, for two years now we’ve heard, nonstop, about Trump’s assault on the foundations of the law and the legal system. Now that he’s actually in a criminal trial, and done nothing more than sit through jury selection, all the talk is about how he’s “met his match” and is “defeated” and even, will he survive this trial?

Transparency? I’m more interested in reporters being transparent about how much of courtroom procedures they don’t understand; and apparently never will.