Live Breaking News & Updates on Beyond a reasonable doubt

Stay informed with the latest breaking news from Beyond a reasonable doubt on our comprehensive webpage. Get up-to-the-minute updates on local events, politics, business, entertainment, and more. Our dedicated team of journalists delivers timely and reliable news, ensuring you're always in the know. Discover firsthand accounts, expert analysis, and exclusive interviews, all in one convenient destination. Don't miss a beat — visit our webpage for real-time breaking news in Beyond a reasonable doubt and stay connected to the pulse of your community

Trump on Trial New York v. Donald Trump

sometimes it's as simple as i came in and served them coffee and i knew donald trump was there with david becker and michael cohen. i don't know what they said but i knew the meeting happened because i keep their diaries. these are the kind of details we may not know but prosecutors will use to tell the broad story that serve as corroboration, corroboration, corroboration. >> how important is it, chuck, that that person that is weaving this story that has to hold up through weeks of testimony, how important is it that that story they tell now in this first phase be told eloquently but also in a simple way so that people can understand it? >> it has to be told linearly, chronologically. i think the key is to make it simple but avoid the simplistic. this is not an overly complex case. the conspiracy, and i take

Donald-trump , Michael-cohen , Meeting , Diaries , Coffee , David-becker , Stormy-daniels-story , Prosecutors , Testimony , Details , Person , Story

Trump on Trial New York v. Donald Trump

that the defense attorneys don't have to do anything. they don't even have to offer an opening statement. she's 100% right. but if they choose to provide an opening statement, they typically do one of two things. either they ask the jury to keep an open mind and point out how high the burden is to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. or if they choose and plan to put on a case, they can begin to foreshadow that now. they can talk about some of the things they will adduce or some of the witnesses they might call. a little more risk in that strategy for a defense attorney. that don't have to do anything. the burden never shifts to the defense. prosecutors better produce. good defense attorneys like caroline know if a prosecutor promises x and they fail to produce x at trial, they're going to hear about it from caroline in closing.

One , Things , Opening-statement , Anything , Defense-attorneys , 100 , Two , Beyond-a-reasonable-doubt , The-jury , Burden , Some , Mind

CNN This Morning

intends to testify. >> i think it's way too early for criminal defendant to make that decision, and i am a criminal defense attorney at this point, so i see it from both sides. now, if donald trump chooses to testify, it's because the underlying elements of this case require the prosecution to establish beyond a reasonable doubt what was the specific intent of donald trump himself? and so if he testifies he's effectively getting up there to say that it was not his intention to cook the books as it were, or to interfere with the election by not according certain payments to election officials. the prosecutors meanwhile, are going to have to build a case to show that donald trump has limited credibility that he's lied on several occasions depending on how you view that the prosecutors have no doubt for air that they prepared a long list of a specific specific instances of untruthfulness, and that's what ultimately will be the fight here if he testifies& bibi believed so what do expecting

Donald-trump , Decision , Case , Elements , Sides , Defendant , Defense-attorney , Point , Prosecution , Intent , Intention , Books

Trump on Trial New York v. Donald Trump

had to lie on your books and records, you had to falsify those records, and that's a crime. so picking a theme, sticking to a 'em that, keeping it simple. these are all standard prosecutorial tools. now, whether or not it works, that's not going to turn on the opening statement. that's going to turn, of course, on the evidence introduced at trial. this is precisely how prosecutors do it. i was a prosecutor for a long time. i tried dozens of cases. i would love to think i won most of those cases because of advocacy. that's not true. you win a case or lose a case in a court of law because you have evidence. so the opening statement is only a preview of that. the evidence will be what matters the most. >> right now we're reading from this document and the reporting coming out of the courtroom that colangelo presenting the opening statement, is actually reading from part of the indictment to the jury.

Crime , Records , Theme , Books , Em , Tools , Evidence , Prosecutor , Civil-fraud-trial , Prosecutors , Opening-statement , Course

Trump on Trial New York v. Donald Trump

that can be brought up, that won't be brought up if he doesn't take the stand? >> no, that's exactly why we have the sandoval hearing, to make sure the defendant is properly informed to make that decision, to make the cost-benefit an analysis? >> the hearing was there to inform the former president that if he does choose to take the stand, there are certain issues that he could be questioned on, perhaps that he might not know that he would be questioned on because you might think they're not pertinent or have anything to do with this case. we sometimes call it other bad acts, evidence typically in evidence, that those types of things are not allowed to be asked. this is so the defendant can make an informed decision. typically, jose, you do not see defendants taking the stand. remember, the defense has zero burden in this case. we're talking a lot about the defendant's witness list. it could be zero. they could not even give an

The-stand , Defendant , Won-t , Decision , Up , Sandoval-hearing , President , Witness-for-the-prosecution , Issues , Cost-benefit , Analysis , Beyond-a-reasonable-doubt

CNN This Morning

prosecutors to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the thoughts and the intentions in donald trump's mind at the time that he was engaged in effective believe, bank stormy daniels to remain silent on the issues of her alleged affair with donald trump quite a day ahead of us. >> andrei tarkovsky. thank you very much for being here to help us understand it. i really appreciate your time. >> let's go now to capitol hill. where house speaker mike johnson's long journey to yes, on ukraine aid has come to an end. pretty remarkable i was with him the night before he made the decision. he preyed on it. and the next day, he said, i want to be on the right side of history the house speaker coming to a decision last week to defy his party's right flank and push through $60 billion in aid for ukraine after months of resistance how did he get their prayer trump and his own son to put it

Donald-trump , Prosecutors , Stormy-daniels , Mind , Intentions , Bank , Believe , Thoughts , Beyond-a-reasonable-doubt , Mike-johnson , Eastern-us , Affair

Trump on Trial New York v. Donald Trump

prove the case beyond all possible doubt. the proof must be beyond reasonable doubt. unbelievable to think what the jury in this courtroom, guys, is going to hear over the next four to six weeks. we're getting word -- we don't have confirmation in our own reporting on this, but "the new york times" reporting that david pecker is going to be the first witness to take the stand after opening statements. the timing of that we don't know considering it's going to be a short day. david pecker, as you well know, stood over the head of ami for over two-plus decades. he had a meeting with michael cohen back in 2016 talking about the possibility of stormy daniels coming forward. he then visited the white house in 2017 as well. he had a longstanding relationship with the former president. so certainly his testimony is going to be integral to the prosecution's case, guys. >> keep us posted, yasmin. i want to bring in chuck rosenberg, former u.s. attorney

Beyond-a-reasonable-doubt , The-jury , Courtroom , Doubt , Proof , Guys , Four , Six , Statements , The-stand , David-pecker , Witness

Trump on Trial New York v. Donald Trump

opening statement. they could never stand up or put anybody on the stand, anything at all. it's the prosecution that has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt and there's absolutely no burden on the defense. >> temidayo, jury instructions expected to take about 30 minutes. any surprises so far based on this sandoval outcome and anything else yasmin reported from the court this morning? >> no surprises. it's consistent. judge merchan is going to judge this case in a conservative manner. i think the prosecution asked for 13 bad acts, they're getting six. sometimes it actually can help the prosecution. prosecutors might have the instinct to go more aggressive. you want to crush that defendant. we've all been there. the judge sometimes can limit your case but it strengthens you on appeal. you go too aggressive, an appellate court might say you

Prosecution , The-stand , Opening-statement , Anything , Burden , Anybody , Doubt , Proving , Complexity , Court , Jury-instructions , Yasmin-vossoughian

Trump on Trial New York v. Donald Trump

the case that these charges should never have even been brought against donald trump in the first place. again, one other time note is that we've got just a little over an hour left of the trial here today. trial will conclude at 12:30 p.m. eastern time. this has been an intense already hour out of the gate here, and now the defense is beginning to open with their statements to the jury. >> 45 minutes, 30 seconds for the prosecution and the defense has indicated they'll have about 20 minutes in their opening statement, and again, let me read that first line from donald trump's lawyer. good morning, your honor. president trump did not commit any crimes. the manhattan d.a.'s office should never have brought this case. barbara first question to you about just wrapping the prosecution's opening statements. 45 minutes 30 seconds. your take on the amount of time they spent laying out their case in this very consequential and historic trial? >> yeah, i always thought shorter is better because the longer you go, you risk losing

Donald-trump , Beyond-a-reasonable-doubt , Civil-fraud-trial , Charges , Place , Little , Eastern-time , Note , Here-today , 12 , One , 30

Trump on Trial New York v. Donald Trump

insistence on so what on earth is a crime. what's a crime of which i just described. he says that these business records, violations, 34 counts are really just 34 pieces of paper. chuck, how necessary is it for a defense in this case or in any case to obfuscate things and to try and clarify those things that can best benefit your client? >> sure, jose, with the caveat, again, that the defense doesn't have to prove anything and the burden never shifts to the defense, trying to make the government's case seem more complex than the government made it is a tact. nothing wrong with it. the defense attorneys have one advantage here. they can say things in their opening statement and not actually have to prove it. at the end of the day, the government cannot at any point

Crime , Business-records , Counts , Pieces , Violations , Earth , Blanche-insistence , 34 , Beyond-a-reasonable-doubt , Complexity , Things , Chuck-rosenberg