The jury needs to decide 34 counts of felony-level falsification of business records in the first-ever criminal trial of an American president.
Jurors began deliberating in former President Donald Trump’s criminal case in New York on May 29, after New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan spent more than one hour instructing the jury on the law.
“Your verdict on each count you consider, whether guilty or not, must be unanimous,” he told jurors. “That is, each and every juror must agree to it.”
‘Intent to Defraud’
Justice Merchan reminded jurors that prosecutors have the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt not only that the charged crime was committed, but that President Trump committed the crime.
President Trump was charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree, meaning the 34 records were allegedly falsified with the intent to conceal another crime.
“Intent means conscious objective or purpose,” the judge defined for jurors. “Intent does not require premeditation. In other words, intent does not require advance planning, nor is it necessary that the intent exist in the person’s mind for a given period of time.”
“In order to prove an intent to defraud, the people need not prove that the defendant acted with the intent to defraud any particular person or entity,” he said. “Intent to defraud is also not constricted to intent to deprive another person of money or property.”
“The People need not prove that the other crime was committed, aided, or concealed,” Justice Merchan said.
The judge set out three possibilities for that other crime: conspiracy to promote or prevent the election of a person to office by unlawful means, they may consider violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), falsification of business records, or violation of tax laws.
FECA makes it unlawful to make contributions to presidential candidates over a certain limit. An expenditure made in cooperation, consultant, or concert with a candidate can be considered a “contribution.” The contribution limit in 2015 and 2016 was $2,700. The judge also explained the press exemption to FECA.
In New York City and the state it is unlawful to knowingly supply or submit false information in connection to taxes, he added, even if this conduct does not result in the underpayment of taxes.
By Catherine Yang and Michael Washburn
