But defendant Donald Trump's project all along has been to
distort the truth surrounding this trial,
to attack the, to attack the process,
to undermine the judicial system.
In yet another last ditch effort,
this afternoon, Trump's lawyers tried to get an emergency stay
from a New York State appeals court,
arguing there was no possible way for Trump to get
a fair trial in Manhattan.
The response from the District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office was
simple.
What the last week has shown is that the jury
selection has worked,
he continued. We have 18 ordinary New Yorkers who are
ready to serve.
It would be unfair to them and the public for
this trial to be delayed further.
End Quote. The appeals court judge agreed and quickly rejected
Trump's request.
Right now, the good news is,
amidst all the intensity in the ruckus,
the judicial system so far has not bent to Trump's
attacks,
despite what he says. The system is working for the
former president just like it would for any other American.
At the end of today,
a full jury, A12 member jury with six alternates was
seated
Donald Trump's peers who may ultimately decide whether or not
to convict him as a felon.
Now, after the jury was selected,
the focus turned to what Trump might say,
not the lies he spews outside the courtroom,
but rather what he might say underoath if he indeed
chooses to take the stand.
Trump has previously indicated that he plans to testify in
this case,
and today he's sticking to that story.
President Trump
are going to testify?
Yes. Now, whether he actually will or not,
we shall see. Under New York law,
if a criminal defendant wishes to testify in their own
defense,
they are granted what is known as a Sandoval Notice,
which ensures that the defendant is aware of the lines
of questioning that the prosecution may ask.
The purpose is to make sure the defendant is not
caught off guard when testifying on the stand.
Some of the things the Manhattan DA's office wants to
cross examine Trump about are the two civil trials that
Trump recently lost,
the E Jean Carroll defamation trial and the New York
fraud trial.
Judge Marchand said today he would decide on Monday what
questions will be permitted during Trump's potential testimony.
Monday's also went opening statements and potentially the first witness
testimony are set to begin.
Joining me now, the aforementioned NBC News correspondent Vaughn Hilliard,
who's been reporting on the trial,
as well as MSNBC legal analyst Catherine Christian,
who served as special assistant DA in the Manhattan District
attorney's office.
Good evening to both of you.
Thank you for being with us.
Vaughn, let's start with this Sandoval hearing,
this idea that Donald Trump says he will testify in
his own defense.
He is entitled to know what the line of questioning
is.
And it's not a given that whatever the DA says
he wants to ask is going to be.
So now the DA, I guess,
presents the judge with the lines of questioning and the
judge determines,
right. This afternoon, the district attorney's office made the case
to the judge that a series of other trial determinations
from aging Carroll lawsuit to the civil fraud lawsuit.
But also there was a couple years ago,
Trump filed the lawsuit against Hillary Clinton and several other
defendants in which he was punished with a $1 million
fine for essentially A frivolous lawsuit.
And they want to present to the jury each of
these different trial,
trial, trial determinations to question the credibility of Donald Trump
is the district attorneys office argued today to the judge.
They said, look, the defense attorneys for Donald Trump are
going to question our witnesses and their credibility from Michael
Cohen to Stormy Daniels.
We should be able to build a body of evidence
out beyond this case that shows in questions Donald Trump's
veracity of the statements that he makes.
Catherine, let's add, let's talk a little bit about these
jurors.
We have, we have 12 jurors and six,
one correction, it is not to
let the defendant know. The line of questioning is to
let the defendant know what prior bad acts they're going
to ask him about,
the other questions he's going to be surprised about.
But anything about, you know,
prior judgments or prior bad acts,
he has to be made aware of that.
Got it. So they do not have to disclose things
that are not about his prior bad acts.
They can, they can go with any line of questioning
they want.
But if they are going to talk about prior things
that have happened to Donald Trump or that he has
done,
then he has to know about that
exactly. Got it. Thank you for that clarification.
Let's talk about 12 jurors,
6 alternates. That's the maximum number of alternates.
Typically speaking, a case doesn't run out of jurors and
alternates.
But as the pressure continues to be on these jurors
and or their identities become known,
either because the media doesn't handle this well or for
whatever reason,
is there any concern that that the that some full
complement of jurors doesn't make it to the end of
this trial?
Definitely. And that's why Judge Michonne chose the maximum allowed
of alternates.
You're allowed in New York unless it's a Murder 1
case six,
We already had one yesterday.
Come back and say on second thought,
she can't handle it. Now there's a weekend.
So the hope is the 12 that are seated will
still remain strong and say that they,
yes, I can still be fair and impartial.
But if they're not, they'll be 6 ready to fill
in.
Of course, we hope the six alternates also will still
want to be on the jury and can still remain
fair and impartial.
And, you know, the judge can and the court can
do something about making the jurors feel more secure.
I think in this case,
which was done in Donald Trump's federal trial,
the judge should and it's going to cost money.
But court officers should be protecting them when they go
to lunch,
maybe in an undisclosed location as a group.
And they should be escorted home in groups.
They all because they have to live in Manhattan.
So we're not talking about a long commute.
So you're not sequestering them.
So they're not staying in the hotel,
but you're protecting them during the pendency of this trial.
What in your opinion, how'd it go?
The jury selection? I mean,
we got it done inside of a week
seem to go with relative haste.
Those people who were not going to be jurors
were were were dismissed quickly.
What was your sense of it?
You were sitting there watching it.
Look, Donald Trump's opportunity had the opportunity to go and
use their peremptory challenges to eliminate several judge jurors,
potential jurors that they question.
And so Donald Trump over the course of the next
6-7 weeks is going to become very familiar with the
faces of those 12 jurors and six alternates that are
in there here. But you know,
when it comes to Donald Trump in the courtroom over
the last year,
he's come quite familiar with one not only from the
civil fraud trial,
but we've got to go back to the EG and
Carroll trial just in January of
2024. There has been a jury that has heard testimony
granted to his three minutes of testimony from Donald Trump.
And they did in January determined that
$87.00 million penalty in the aging Carroll defamation suit.
So Donald Trump has had a New York jury before
rule against him here.
And now the question here is over the course of
these six to seven weeks with that intense pressure that
are on these individuals.
Of course, we heard them even during their vetting process,
if you may say, several of them question.
You know, look, I've heard from family and friends,
even colleagues to question am IA juror and with such
identifying,
you know, from everything from a neighborhood to their jobs
to whether they're married or not.
Undoubtedly over the weeks ahead,
folks are going to become familiar with those closest to
them of who these jurors are.
Now for Donald Trump, you know,
it's out of his control.
It's in his it's in the
the hands of his legal team unless he
chooses to testify. Catherine, what let's talk about this business
about Donald Trump testifying.
He maintains he's going to is
that good or bad for him and do you think
it'll happen?
I well, I don't think it will happen.
I mean, he has an absolute right to testify
and unfortunately for his attorneys,
they have no control over him,
which is another reason why he shouldn't testify.
But if he does, I think it will be good
for the prosecution case and bad for his case because
he's out of control and this judge will not let
him sit there and pontificate.
He will have to answer questions and the judge could
just shut him down if he's not following the rules.
When I say shut him down,
meaning you're off the stand,
it's over. If he's not following the rules and he's
not answering questions,
why? Because there's a jury there.
This is not like the civil fraud case where it's
just a judge.
There's a jury there and this judge will not allow
there to be prejudicial information getting to this jury.
Vaughn talking about following the rules.
There are already some questions about whether Donald Trump's been
following the rules in terms of the things that he's
been posting.
But yesterday the prosecution
was, well, the prosecution was supposed to tell the the
court who they're going to call to the stand on
Monday.
Yesterday, the defense asked for
the the first three witness names.
The prosecution said they didn't trust Donald Trump not to
tweet those names.
So they said they will give the defense one name
on Sunday.
And quote, if that should be tweeted,
that's the last time we will provide that courtesy.
Now, this seems to be a bit bit of back
and forth between the Trump defense team and the prosecutor.
Is the judge sounded in on this
Judge Marshawn when Todd Blanche Donald Trump's attorney went to
the judge looking for that request and he Todd Blanche
said well I could affirm that my client Donald Trump
is not going to post on social media about the
names of these witnesses and Judge Marshawn said I don't
know if we can trust your representation on behalf of
your client right. Essentially a head nod saying you and
may good faith be making that statement,
right? But we have all seen Donald Trump operate and
we don't know if we can trust that.
So what they have allowed is on Monday,
the prosecution, they said out of respect and deference for
the legal team,
they will provide the name of the witness that will
come forward on Monday.
A court will be abbreviated for Passover on Monday will
only go till 2:00 PM Eastern.
So we are expecting the just the initial questioning of
this witness,
but then the cross examination will not begin until at
least Tuesday.
How is that? How does that work practically,
Catherine? I mean, at some point the witnesses will be
known.
So what's the goal here and what's the thing,
what's the assurance that the court has to have from
Donald Trump about what he will not do as it
relates to witnesses,
because in theory, there will be a series of witnesses
whom we will know about.
Well, there's a gag order
which in my opinion he's been violating
and there's a a hearing on that on Tuesday.
So typically when you have a normal case and you
have a defendant who is not like Donald Trump,
you give over the witness list to the defense and
you say,
and you announce in court tomorrow we're going to call
Mr.
Jones, Miss Smith, and if there's time,
you know, Miss Christian, so the defense will know and
you do that as a courtesy so they can prepare
their cross examination.
But in this case and the the prosecutors are right
to do this.
You don't want to do that with this particular defendant
because you don't want him,
as they said, tweeting about them and intimidating them before
they take the stand.
Because they the same way we're concerned about jurors being
afraid to come to court,
same thing will happen with witnesses.
They don't want want that to happen to them because
when Donald Trump tweets negatively about people,
his followers, some of them
tend to attack those people.
It'll be an interesting few days to watch.
Thank you to both of you.
We appreciate it. Catherine Christian is an MSNBC legal analyst.
Vaughn Hilliard is an NBC News correspondent.
We appreciate your time tonight.