Read the Jury Instructions in the Trump Manhattan Criminal Trial (2024)

Post-Summation InstructionsIntroductionMembers of the jury, I will now instruct you on the law. I willfirst review the general principles of law that apply to this caseand all criminal cases.You have heard me explain some of those principles at thebeginning of the trial. I am sure you can appreciate the benefitsof repeating those instructions at this stage of the proceedings.Next, I will define the crimes charged in this case, explainthe law that applies to those definitions, and spell out theelements of each charged crime.Finally, I will outline the process of jury deliberations.These instructions will take at least an hour, and you willnot receive copies of them. You may however, request that Iread them back to you in whole or in part as many times as youwish, and I will be happy to do so.Page | 1

Role of Court and JuryDuring these instructions, I will not summarize theevidence. If necessary, I may refer to portions of the evidenceto explain the law that relates to it. My reference to evidence,or my decision not to refer to evidence, expresses no opinionabout the truthfulness, accuracy, or importance of any particularevidence. In fact, nothing I have said in the course of this trialwas meant to suggest that I have an opinion about this case. Ifyou have formed an impression that I do have an opinion, youmust put it out of your mind and disregard it.The level of my voice or intonation may vary during theseinstructions. If I do that, it is done to help you understand. It isnot done to communicate any opinion about the law or the factsof the case or of whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty.It is not my responsibility to judge the evidence here. It isyours. You are the judges of the facts, and you are responsiblefor deciding whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty.Page 2

Reminder: FairnessRemember, you have promised to be a fair juror. A fair juroris a person who will keep their promise to be fair and impartialand who will not permit the verdict to be influenced by a bias orprejudice in favor of or against a person who appeared in thistrial on account of that person's race, color, national origin,ancestry, gender, gender identity or expression, religion,religious practice, age, disability or sexual orientation, andfurther, a fair juror must be mindful of any stereotypes orattitudes about people or about groups of people that the jurormay have, and must not allow those stereotypes or attitudes toaffect their verdict.As I have explained, we all develop and hold unconsciousviews on many subjects. Some of those unconscious views maycome from stereotypes and attitudes about people or groups ofpeople that may impact on a person's thinking and decision-making without that person even knowing it. As a juror, you areasked to make a very important decision about another memberof the community. I know you would not want to make thatdecision based on such stereotypes or attitudes, that is, on whatwe call implicit biases, and it would be wrong for you to do so. Afair juror must guard against the impact of such stereotypes orattitudes. You can do this by asking yourself during yourdeliberations whether your views and conclusions would bedifferent if the defendant, witnesses or others that you haveheard about or seen in court were of a different race, color,national origin, ancestry, gender, gender identity or expression,religious practice, age or sexual orientation, or if they did nothave a disability. If the answer is yes, then, in keeping with yourpromise to be fair, reconsider your views and conclusions alongwith the other jurors, and make sure your verdict is based on theevidence and not on stereotypes or attitudes. Justice requires noless.Page 3

Limiting Instruction Regarding the DefendantJurors, you will recall that during jury selection you agreedthat you would set aside any personal opinions or bias you mighthave in favor of or against the Defendant, and that you woulddecide this case fairly on the evidence and the law. Again, Idirect you to decide this case on the evidence and the law as itrelates to the Defendant here on trial. You must set aside anypersonal opinions or bias you might have in favor of or againstthe Defendant, and you must not allow any such opinions toinfluence your verdict.Page 4

Sentence: Not ConsiderRemember also, in your deliberations, you may notconsider or speculate about matters relating to sentence orpunishment. If there is a verdict of guilty, it will be myresponsibility to impose an appropriate sentence.Page 5

EvidenceWhen you judge the facts, you are to consider only theevidence.The evidence in the case includes:the testimony of the witnesses,the exhibits that were received in evidence, and thestipulations agreed to by the parties. Remember, a stipulationis information the parties have agreed to present to the jury asevidence, without calling a witness to testify.Testimony which was stricken from the record or to whichan objection was sustained must be disregarded by you.Exhibits that were received in evidence are available, uponyour request, for your inspection and consideration.Exhibits that were just seen during the trial, or marked foridentification but not received in evidence, are not evidence, andare thus not available for your inspection and consideration.But testimony based on those exhibits that were notreceived in evidence may be considered by you. It is just thatthe exhibit itself is not available for your inspection andconsideration.Page 6

Evidentiary InferencesIn evaluating the evidence, you may consider any fact thatis proven and any inference which may be drawn from such fact.To draw an inference means to infer, find, conclude that afact exists or does not exist based upon proof of some other factor facts.For example, suppose you go to bed one night when it isnot raining and when you wake up in the morning, you look outyour window; you do not see rain, but you see that the street andsidewalk are wet, and that people are wearing raincoats andcarrying umbrellas. Under those circ*mstances, it may bereasonable to infer, that is conclude, that it rained during thenight. In other words, the fact of it having rained while you wereasleep is an inference that might be drawn from the proven factsof the presence of the water on the street and sidewalk, andpeople in raincoats and carrying umbrellas.An inference must only be drawn from a proven fact or factsand then only if the inference flows naturally, reasonably, andlogically from the proven fact or facts, not if it is speculative.Therefore, in deciding whether to draw an inference, you mustlook at and consider all the facts in the light of reason, commonsense, and experience.Page 7

REDACTIONSAs you know, certain exhibits were admitted into evidencewith some portions blacked out or redacted. Those redactionswere made to remove personal identifying information and toensure that only relevant admissible evidence was put beforeyou. You may not speculate as to what material was redactedor why, and you may not draw any inference, favorable orunfavorable against either party, from the fact that certainmaterial has been redacted.Page 8

Limiting InstructionsYou may recall that I instructed you several times during the trialthat certain exhibits were being accepted into evidence for alimited purpose only and that you were not to consider thatevidence for any other purpose. Under the law we refer to thatas a limiting instruction. I will now remind you of some of thelimiting instructions you were given during the trial.AMI - You will recall that you heard testimony that while DavidPecker was an executive at AMI, AMI entered into a non-prosecution agreement with federal prosecutors, as well as aconciliation agreement with the Federal Election Commission(FEC). I remind you that evidence was permitted to assist you,the jury, in assessing David Pecker's credibility and to helpprovide context for some of the surrounding events. You mayconsider that testimony for those purposes only. Neither thenon-prosecution agreement, nor the conciliation agreement isevidence of the Defendant's guilt, and you may not considerthem in determining whether the Defendant is guilty or not guiltyof the charged crimes.Michael Cohen - You also heard testimony that the FederalElection Commission ("FEC") conducted an investigation into thepayment to Stormy Daniels and of responses submitted byMichael Cohen and his attorney to the investigation. Thatevidence was permitted to assist you, the jury, in assessingMichael Cohen's credibility and to help provide context for someof the surrounding events. You may consider that evidence forthose purposes only. Likewise, you will recall that you heardtestimony that Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to violating theFederal Election Campaign Act, otherwise known as FECA. Iremind you that evidence was permitted to assist you, the jury,in assessing Mr. Cohen's credibility as a witness and to helpprovide context for some of the events that followed. You mayPage 9

consider that testimony for those purposes only. Neither the factof the FEC investigation, Mr. Cohen and his attorney's responsesor the fact that Mr. Cohen pleaded guilty, constitutes evidence ofthe Defendant's guilt and you may not consider them indetermining whether the Defendant is guilty or not guilty of thecharged crimes.-Wall Street Journal News articles You will recall that certainWall Street Journal news articles were accepted into evidenceduring the trial. I remind you now that the articles wereaccepted and may be considered by you for the limited purposeof demonstrating that the articles were published on or about acertain date and to provide context for the other evidence. Theexhibits may not be considered by you as evidence that any ofthe assertions in the articles is true.-Other hearsay evidence not accepted for its truth – There wereother exhibits which contained hearsay and were not acceptedfor the truth of the matter asserted but for another purpose. Forexample, there were several National Enquirer headlines and aninvoice from Investor Advisory Services (People's 161). Thosewere accepted for the limited purpose of demonstrating that thearticles were published and the document created.There were also some text messages that were accepted with asimilar limitation. For example, People's Exhibit 171.A withrespect to Gina Rodriguez's texts only and 257 with respect toChris Cuomo's texts only. Those text messages were acceptedfor the limited purpose of providing context for the responses byDylan Howard and Michael Cohen.The exhibits which were accepted into evidence with a limitinginstruction are 152, 153.A, 153.B, 153.C, 161, 171.A, 180, 181and 257.Page 10

If you have any additional questions or need clarification as towhich exhibits were accepted into evidence with limitations, justsend me a note with your question and I will be happy to clarify.Presumption of InnocenceWe now turn to the fundamental principles of our law thatapply in all criminal trials-the presumption of innocence, theburden of proof, and the requirement of proof beyond areasonable doubt.Throughout these proceedings, the defendant is presumedto be innocent. As a result, you must find the defendant notguilty, unless, on the evidence presented at this trial, youconclude that the People have proven the defendant guiltybeyond a reasonable doubt.In determining whether the People have satisfied theirburden of proving the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonabledoubt, you may consider all the evidence presented, whether bythe People or by the defendant. In doing so, however, rememberthat, even though the defendant introduced evidence, the burdenof proof remains on the People.Defendant Did Not TestifyThe fact that the defendant did not testify is not a factorfrom which any inference unfavorable to the defendant may bedrawn.Page 11

Burden of ProofThe defendant is not required to prove that he is not guilty.In fact, the defendant is not required to prove or disproveanything. To the contrary, the People have the burden ofproving the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Thatmeans, before you can find the defendant guilty of a crime, thePeople must prove beyond a reasonable doubt every element ofthe crime including that the defendant is the person whocommitted that crime. The burden of proof never shifts from thePeople to the defendant. If the People fail to satisfy their burdenof proof, you must find the defendant not guilty and if the Peoplesatisfy their burden of proof, you must find the defendant guilty.Page 12

Reasonable DoubtWhat does our law mean when it requires proof of guilt"beyond a reasonable doubt"?The law uses the term, "proof beyond a reasonable doubt,"to tell you how convincing the evidence of guilt must be to permita verdict of guilty. The law recognizes that, in dealing with humanaffairs, there are very few things in this world that we know withabsolute certainty. Therefore, the law does not require thePeople to prove a defendant guilty beyond all possible doubt. Onthe other hand, it is not sufficient to prove that the defendant isprobably guilty. In a criminal case, the proof of guilt must bestronger than that. It must be beyond a reasonable doubt.A reasonable doubt is an honest doubt of the defendant'sguilt for which a reason exists based upon the nature and qualityof the evidence. It is an actual doubt, not an imaginary doubt. Itis a doubt that a reasonable person, acting in a matter of thisimportance, would be likely to entertain because of the evidencethat was presented or because of the lack of convincingevidence.Proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is proof thatleaves you so firmly convinced of the defendant's guilt that youhave no reasonable doubt of the existence of any element of thecrime or of the defendant's identity as the person who committedthe crime.In determining whether the People have proven thedefendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, you should beguided solely by a full and fair evaluation of the evidence. Aftercarefully evaluating the evidence, each of you must decidePage 13

whether that evidence convinces you beyond a reasonable doubtof the defendant's guilt.Whatever your verdict may be, it must not rest uponbaseless speculation. Nor may it be influenced in any way bybias, prejudice, sympathy, or by a desire to bring an end to yourdeliberations or to avoid an unpleasant duty.If you are not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt thatthe defendant is guilty of a charged crime, you must find thedefendant not guilty of that crime and if you are convincedbeyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of acharged crime, you must find the defendant guilty of that crime.Page 14

Credibility of WitnessesIntroductionAs judges of the facts, you alone determine the truthfulnessand accuracy of the testimony of each witness.You must decide whether a witness told the truth and wasaccurate, or instead, testified falsely or was mistaken. Youmust also decide what importance to give to the testimony youaccept as truthful and accurate. It is the quality of the testimonythat is controlling, not the number of witnesses who testify.Accept in Whole or in Part (Falsus in Uno)If you find that any witness has intentionally testified falselyas to any material fact, you may disregard that witness's entiretestimony. Or, you may disregard so much of it as you find wasuntruthful, and accept so much of it as you find to have beentruthful and accurate.Credibility factorsThere is no particular formula for evaluating thetruthfulness and accuracy of another person's statements ortestimony. You bring to this process all of your variedexperiences. In life, you frequently decide the truthfulness andaccuracy of statements made to you by other people. The samefactors used to make those decisions, should be used in thiscase when evaluating the testimony.Page 15

In GeneralSome of the factors that you may wish to consider inevaluating the testimony of a witness are as follows:Did the witness have an opportunity to see or hear theevents about which he or she testified?Did the witness have the ability to recall those eventsaccurately?Was the testimony of the witness plausible and likely to betrue, or was it implausible and not likely to be true?Was the testimony of the witness consistent or inconsistentwith other testimony or evidence in the case?Did the manner in which the witness testified reflect uponthe truthfulness of that witness's testimony?To what extent, if any, did the witness's background,training, education, or experience affect the believability of thatwitness's testimony?Did the witness have a conscious bias, hostility or someother attitude that affected the truthfulness of the witness'stestimony?Did the witness show an "unconscious bias," that is, a biasthat the witness may have even unknowingly acquired fromstereotypes and attitudes about people or groups of people, andif so, did that unconscious bias impact that witness's ability to betruthful and accurate.Page | 16

MotiveYou may consider whether a witness had, or did not have,a motive to lie.If a witness had a motive to lie, you may consider whetherand to what extent, if any, that motive affected the truthfulness ofthat witness's testimony.If a witness did not have a motive to lie, you may considerthat as well in evaluating the witness's truthfulness.BenefitYou may consider whether a witness hopes for or expectsto receive a benefit for testifying. If so, you may considerwhether and to what extent it affected the truthfulness of thewitness's testimony.Interest/Lack of InterestYou may consider whether a witness has any interest inthe outcome of the case, or instead, whether the witness has nosuch interest.You are not required to reject the testimony of an interestedwitness, or to accept the testimony of a witness who has nointerest in the outcome of the case.You may, however, consider whether an interest in theoutcome, or the lack of such interest, affected the truthfulness ofthe witness's testimony.Page 17

Previous Criminal ConductYou may consider whether a witness has been convictedof a crime or has engaged in criminal conduct, and if so, whetherand to what extent it affects your evaluation of the truthfulness ofthat witness's testimony.You are not required to reject the testimony of a witness.who has been convicted of a crime or has engaged in criminalconduct, or to accept the testimony of a witness who has not.You may, however, consider whether a witness's criminalconviction or conduct has affected the truthfulness of thewitness's testimony.Page 18

Inconsistent StatementsYou may consider whether a witness made statements atthis trial that are inconsistent with each other.You may also consider whether a witness made previousstatements that are inconsistent with his or her testimony at trial.You may consider whether a witness testified to a fact hereat trial that the witness omitted to state, at a prior time, when itwould have been reasonable and logical for the witness to havestated the fact. In determining whether it would have beenreasonable and logical for the witness to have stated the omittedfact, you may consider whether the witness' attention was calledto the matter and whether the witness was specifically askedabout it.If a witness has made such inconsistent statements oromissions, you may consider whether and to what extent theyaffect the truthfulness or accuracy of that witness's testimonyhere at this trial.The contents of a prior inconsistent statement are not proofof what happened. You may use evidence of a priorinconsistent statement only to evaluate the truthfulness oraccuracy of the witness's testimony here at trial.Page 19

ConsistencyYou may consider whether a witness's testimony isconsistent with the testimony of other witnesses or with otherevidence in the case.If there were inconsistencies by or among witnesses, youmay consider whether they were significant inconsistenciesrelated to important facts, or instead were the kind of minorinconsistencies that one might expect from multiple witnesses tothe same event.Witness Pre-trial PreparationYou have heard testimony about the prosecution anddefense counsel_speaking to a witness about the case before thewitness testified at this trial. The law permits the prosecutionand defense counsel to speak to a witness about the case beforethe witness testifies, and permits a prosecutor and defensecounsel to review with the witness the questions that will or maybe asked at trial, including the questions that may be asked oncross-examination.You have also heard testimony that a witness read orreviewed certain materials pertaining to this case before thewitness testified at trial. The law permits a witness to do so.Speaking to a witness about his or her testimony andpermitting the witness to review materials pertaining to the casebefore the witness testifies is a normal part of preparing for trial.It is not improper as long as it is not suggested that the witnessdepart from the truth.Page | 20

IdentificationThe People have the burden of proving beyond areasonable doubt, not only that a charged crime was committed,but that the defendant is the person who committed that crime.Thus, even if you are convinced beyond a reasonabledoubt that a charged crime was committed by someone, youcannot convict the defendant of that crime unless you are alsoconvinced beyond a reasonable doubt that he is the person whocommitted that crime.Page 21

Accomplice as a Matter of LawUnder our law, Michael Cohen is an accomplice becausethere is evidence that he participated in a crime based uponconduct involved in the allegations here against the defendant.Our law is especially concerned about the testimony of anaccomplice who implicates another in the commission of a crime,particularly when the accomplice has received, expects or hopesfor a benefit in return for his testimony.Therefore, our law provides that a defendant may not beconvicted of any crime upon the testimony of an accompliceunless it is supported by corroborative evidence tending toconnect the defendant with the commission of that crime.In other words, even if you find the testimony of MichaelCohen to be believable, you may not convict the defendant solelyupon that testimony unless you also find that it was corroboratedby other evidence tending to connect the defendant with thecommission of the crime.The corroborative evidence need not, by itself, prove thata crime was committed or that the defendant is guilty. What thelaw requires is that there be evidence that tends to connect thedefendant with the commission of the crime charged in such away as may reasonably satisfy you that the accomplice is tellingthe truth about the defendant's participation in that crime.In determining whether there is the necessarycorroboration, you may consider whether there is material,believable evidence, apart from the testimony of Michael Cohen,which itself tends to connect the defendant with the commissionof the crime.Page 22

You may also consider whether there is material,believable evidence, apart from the testimony of Michael Cohen,which, while it does not itself tend to connect the defendant withthe commission of the crime charged, it nonetheless soharmonizes with the narrative of the accomplice as to satisfy youthat the accomplice is telling the truth about the defendant'sparticipation in the crime and thereby tends to connect thedefendant to the commission of the crime.Page | 23

The Charged CrimesI will now instruct you on the law applicable to the chargedoffenses.That offense is Falsifying Business Records in the FirstDegree 34 Counts.-Page 24

Accessorial LiabilityOur law recognizes that two or more individuals can actjointly to commit a crime, and that in certain circ*mstances, eachcan be held criminally liable for the acts of the others. In thatsituation, those persons can be said to be "acting in concert" witheach other.Our law defines the circ*mstances under which one personmay be criminally liable for the conduct of another. That definitionis as follows:When one person engages in conduct whichconstitutes an offense, another is criminally liable for suchconduct when, acting with the state of mind required for thecommission of that offense, he or she solicits, requests,commands, importunes, or intentionally aids such personto engage in such conduct.Under that definition, mere presence at the scene of acrime, even with knowledge that the crime is taking place, ormere association with a perpetrator of a crime, does not by itselfmake a defendant criminally liable for that crime.In order for the defendant to be held criminally liable for theconduct of another which constitutes an offense, you must findbeyond a reasonable doubt:(1) That he solicited, requested, commanded, importuned,or intentionally aided that person to engage in that conduct, and(2) That he did so with the state of mind required for thecommission of the offense.Page | 25

If it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendantis criminally liable for the conduct of another, the extent or degreeof the defendant's participation in the crime does not matter. Adefendant proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be criminallyliable for the conduct of another in the commission of a crime isas guilty of the crime as if the defendant, personally, hadcommitted every act constituting the crime.The People have the burden of proving beyond areasonable doubt that the defendant acted with the state of mindrequired for the commission of the crime, and either personally,or by acting in concert with another person, committed each ofthe remaining elements of the crime.Your verdict, on each count you consider, whether guilty ornot guilty, must be unanimous. In order to find the defendantguilty, however, you need not be unanimous on whether thedefendant committed the crime personally, or by acting in concertwith another, or both.Page 26

The Charged CrimesI will now instruct you on the law applicable to the chargedoffense. That offense is FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDSIN THE FIRST DEGREE – 34 COUNTS.-FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDSIN THE FIRST DEGREEPenal Law § 175.10Under our law, a person is guilty of falsifying business.records in the first degree when, with intent to defraud thatincludes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or concealthe commission thereof, that person:makes or causes a false entry in the business records ofan enterprise.The following terms used in that definition have a specialmeaning:ENTERPRISE means any entity of one or more persons,corporate or otherwise, public or private, engaged in business,commercial, professional, industrial, social, political orgovernmental activity.BUSINESS RECORD means any writing or article,including computer data or a computer program, kept ormaintained by an enterprise for the purpose of evidencing orreflecting its condition or activity.Page 27

INTENT means conscious objective or purpose. Thus, aperson acts with intent to defraud when his or her consciousobjective or purpose is to do so. Intent does not requirepremeditation. In other words, intent does not require advanceplanning. Nor is it necessary that the intent be in a person's mindfor any particular period of time. The intent can be formed, andneed only exist, at the very moment the person engages inprohibited conduct or acts to cause the prohibited result, and notat any earlier time.The question naturally arises as to how to determinewhether a defendant had the intent required for the commissionof a crime.To make that determination in this case, you must decideif the required intent can be inferred beyond a reasonable doubtfrom the proven facts.In doing so, you may consider the person's conduct and allof the circ*mstances surrounding that conduct, including, but notlimited to, the following:what, if anything, did the person do or say;what result, if any, followed the person's conduct; andwas that result the natural, necessary and probableconsequence of that conduct.Therefore, in this case, from the facts you find to have beenproven, decide whether you can infer beyond a reasonable doubtthat the defendant had the intent required for the commission ofthis crime.Page 28

INTENT TO DEFRAUDAs I previously explained, a person acts with intent todefraud when his or her conscious objective or purpose is to doSO.In order to prove an intent to defraud, the People need notprove that the defendant acted with the intent to defraud anyparticular person or entity. A general intent to defraud any personor entity suffices.Intent to defraud is also not constricted to an intent todeprive another of property or money and can extend beyondeconomic concerns.INTENT TO COMMIT OR CONCEAL ANOTHER CRIMEFor the crime of Falsifying Business Records in the FirstDegree, the intent to defraud must include an intent to commitanother crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.Under our law, although the People must prove an intentto commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commissionthereof, they need not prove that the other crime was in factcommitted, aided, or concealed.Page 29

NEW YORK ELECTION LAW § 17-152 PREDICATEThe People allege that the other crime the defendantintended to commit, aid, or conceal is a violation of New YorkElection Law section 17-152.Section 17-152 of the New York Election Law provides thatany two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent theelection of any person to a public office by unlawful means andwhich conspiracy is acted upon by one or more of the partiesthereto, shall be guilty of conspiracy to promote or prevent anelection.Under our law, a person is guilty of such a conspiracywhen, with intent that conduct be performed that would promoteor prevent the election of a person to public office by unlawfulmeans, he or she agrees with one or more persons to engage inor cause the performance of such conduct.Knowledge of a conspiracy does not by itself make thedefendant a coconspirator. The defendant must intend thatconduct be performed that would promote or prevent the electionof a person to public office by unlawful means. Intent meansconscious objective or purpose. Thus, a person acts with theintent that conduct be performed that would promote or preventthe election of a person to public office by unlawful means whenhis or her conscious objective or purpose is that such conduct beperformed.Evidence that defendant was present when others agreedto engage in the performance of a crime does not by itself showthat he personally agreed to engage in the conspiracy.Page 30

"By Unlawful Means"Although you must conclude unanimously that thedefendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of anyperson to a public office by unlawful means, you need not beunanimous as to what those unlawful means were.In determining whether the defendant conspired topromote or prevent the election of any person to a public officeby unlawful means, you may consider the following: (1) violationsof the Federal Election Campaign Act otherwise known as FECA;(2) the falsification of other business records; or (3) violation oftax laws.THE FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACTThe first of the People's theories of “unlawful means" whichI will now define for you is the Federal Election Campaign Act.Under the Federal Election Campaign Act, it is unlawful foran individual to willfully make a contribution to any candidate withrespect to any election for federal office, including the office ofPresident of the United States, which exceeds a certain limit. In2015 and 2016, that limit was $2,700. It is also unlawful underthe Federal Election Campaign Act for any corporation to willfullymake a contribution of any amount to a candidate or candidate'scampaign in connection with any federal election, or for anyperson to cause such a corporate contribution. For purposes ofthese prohibitions, an expenditure made in cooperation,consultation, or concert with, or at the request or suggestion of,a candidate or his agents shall be considered to be a contributionto such candidate.Page 31

The terms CONTRIBUTION and EXPENDITURE includeanything of value, including any purchase, payment, loan, oradvance, made by any person for the purpose of influencing anyelection for federal office.Under federal law, a third party's payment of a candidate'sexpenses is deemed to be a contribution to the candidate unlessthe payment would have been made irrespective of thecandidacy.If the payment would have been made even in the absenceof the candidacy, the payment should not be treated as acontribution.FECA's definitions of "contribution" and "expenditure" donot include any cost incurred in covering or carrying a news story,commentary, or editorial by a magazine, periodical publication,or similar press entity, so long as such activity is a normal,legitimate press function. This is called the press exemption.For example, the term legitimate press function includessolicitation letters seeking new subscribers to a publication.FALSIFICATION OF OTHER BUSINESS RECORDSThe second of the People's theories of "unlawful means"which I will define for you now is the falsification of other businessrecords.Under New York law, a person is guilty of Falsifying.Business Records in the Second Degree when with intent todefraud, he or she makes or causes a false entry in the businessrecords of an enterprise.Page 32

I previously defined for you the terms enterprise, businessrecords, and intent to defraud.For purposes of determining whether Falsifying BusinessRecords in the Second Degree was an unlawful means used bya conspiracy to promote or prevent an election here, you mayconsider: (i) the bank records associated with Michael Cohen'saccount formation paperwork for Resolution Consultants LLCand Essential Consultants LLC accounts; (ii) the bank recordsassociated with Michael Cohen's wire to Keith Davidson; (iii) theinvoice from Investor Advisory Services Inc. to ResolutionConsultants LLC; and (iv) the 1099-MISC forms that the TrumpOrganization issued to Michael Cohen.Page 33

VIOLATION OF TAX LAWSThe People's third theory of “unlawful means" which I willdefine for you now is a Violation of Tax Laws.Under New York State and New York City law, it is unlawfulto knowingly supply or submit materially false or fraudulentinformation in connection with any tax return.Likewise, under federal law, it is unlawful for a person towillfully make any tax return, statement, or other document thatis fraudulent or false as to any material matter, or that the persondoes not believe to be true and correct as to every materialmatter.Under these federal, state, and local laws, such conduct isunlawful even if it does not result in underpayment of taxes.COUNT-SPECIFICIn order for you to find the defendant guilty of the crime ofFalsifying Business Records in the First Degree under Count 1of the Indictment, the People are required to prove, from all ofthe evidence in the case, beyond a reasonable doubt, each ofthe following two elements:1. That on or about February 14, 2017, in the county ofNew York and elsewhere, the defendant, personally, orby acting in concert with another person or persons,made or caused a false entry in the business records ofan enterprise, specifically, an invoice from MichaelCohen dated February 14, 2017, marked as a record ofthe Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, and kept ormaintained by the Trump Organization; andPage 34

2. That the defendant did so with intent to defraud thatincluded an intent to commit another crime or to aid orconceal the commission thereof.If you find the People have proven beyond a reasonabledoubt each of those two elements, you must find the defendantguilty of this crime.If you find the People have not proven beyond areasonable doubt either one or both of those two elements, youmust find the defendants not guilty of this crime.You have now heard me define the law for Count One.There are thirty-three remaining counts in the indictment. Eachfor Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree and eachoccurring in New York County. The only difference is that eachcount pertains to a different business record and possibly adifferent date. The underlying law applies in the same way toeach of the remaining counts so I will only repeat it in full onemore time before I read Count 34. Of course, you can ask me torepeat the law in its entirety as many times as you wish and I willbe happy to do so.The second count pertains to an entry in the Detail GeneralLedger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, datedFebruary 14, 2017, bearing voucher number 842457, andkept or maintained by the Trump Organization.The third count pertains to an entry in the Detail GeneralLedger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, datedFebruary 14, 2017, bearing voucher number 842460, andkept or maintained by the Trump Organization.The fourth count pertains to a Donald J. Trump RevocableTrust Account check and check stub dated February 14,2017, bearing check number 000138, and kept ormaintained by the Trump Organization.Page | 35

The fifth count pertains to an invoice from Michael Cohendated March 16, 2017, marked as a record of the DonaldJ. Trump Revocable Trust, and kept or maintained by theTrump Organization.The sixth count pertains to an entry in the Detail GeneralLedger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, datedMarch 17, 2017, bearing voucher number 846907, andkept or maintained by the Trump Organization.The seventh count pertains to a Donald J. TrumpRevocable Trust Account check and check stub datedMarch 17, 2017, bearing check number 000147, and keptor maintained by the Trump Organization.The eighth count pertains to an invoice from MichaelCohen dated April 13, 2017, marked as a record of DonaldJ. Trump, and kept or maintained by the Trump.Organization.The ninth count pertains to an entry in the Detail GeneralLedger for Donald J. Trump, dated June 19, 2017, bearingvoucher number 858770, and kept or maintained by theTrump Organization.The tenth count pertains to a Donald J. Trump accountcheck and check stub dated June 19, 2017, bearing checknumber 002740, and kept or maintained by the Trump.Organization.The eleventh count pertains to an invoice from MichaelCohen dated May 22, 2017, marked as a record of DonaldJ. Trump, and kept or maintained by the TrumpOrganization.Page 36

The twelfth count pertains to an entry in the Detail GeneralLedger for Donald J. Trump, dated May 22, 2017, bearingvoucher number 855331, and kept or maintained by theTrump Organization.The thirteenth count pertains to a Donald J. Trump accountcheck and check stub dated May 23, 2017, bearing checknumber 002700, and kept or maintained by the TrumpOrganization.The fourteenth count pertains to an invoice from MichaelCohen dated June 16, 2017, marked as a record of DonaldJ. Trump, and kept or maintained by the TrumpOrganization.The fifteenth count pertains to an entry in the DetailGeneral Ledger for Donald J. Trump, dated June 19, 2017,bearing voucher number 858772, and kept or maintainedby the Trump Organization.The sixteenth count pertains to a Donald J. Trump accountcheck and check stub dated June 19, 2017, bearing checknumber 002741, and kept or maintained by the Trump.Organization.The seventeenth count pertains to an invoice from MichaelCohen dated July 11, 2017, marked as a record of DonaldJ. Trump, and kept or maintained by the Trump.Organization.The eighteenth count pertains to an entry in the DetailGeneral Ledger for Donald J. Trump, dated July 11, 2017,bearing voucher number 861096, and kept or maintainedby the Trump Organization.Page 37

The nineteenth count pertains to a Donald J. Trumpaccount check and check stub dated July 11, 2017, bearingcheck number 002781, and kept or maintained by theTrump Organization.The twentieth count pertains to an invoice from MichaelCohen dated August 1, 2017, marked as a record ofDonald J. Trump, and kept or maintained by the TrumpOrganization.The twenty-first count pertains to an entry in the DetailGeneral Ledger for Donald J. Trump, dated August 1,2017, bearing voucher number 863641, and kept ormaintained by the Trump Organization.The twenty-second count pertains to a Donald J. Trumpaccount check and check stub dated August 1, 2017,bearing check number 002821, and kept or maintained bythe Trump Organization.The twenty-third count pertains to an invoice from MichaelCohen dated September 11, 2017, marked as a record ofDonald J. Trump, and kept or maintained by the Trump.Organization.The twenty-fourth count pertains to an entry in the DetailGeneral Ledger for Donald J. Trump, dated September 11,2017, bearing voucher number 868174, and kept ormaintained by the Trump Organization.The twenty-fifth count pertains to a Donald J. Trump.account check and check stub dated September 12, 2017,bearing check number 002908, and kept or maintained bythe Trump Organization.Page 38

The twenty-sixth count pertains to an invoice from MichaelCohen dated October 18, 2017, marked as a record ofDonald J. Trump, and kept or maintained by the Trump.Organization.The twenty-seventh count pertains to an entry in the DetailGeneral Ledger for Donald J. Trump, dated October 18,2017, bearing voucher number 872654, and kept ormaintained by the Trump Organization.The twenty-eighth count pertains to a Donald J. Trump.account check and check stub dated October 18, 2017,bearing check number 002944, and kept or maintained bythe Trump Organization.The twenty-ninth count pertains to an invoice from MichaelCohen dated November 20, 2017, marked as a record ofDonald J. Trump, and kept or maintained by the Trump.Organization.The thirtieth count pertains to an entry in the Detail GeneralLedger for Donald J. Trump, dated November 20, 2017,bearing voucher number 876511, and kept or maintainedby the Trump Organization.The thirty-first count pertains to a Donald J. Trump accountcheck and check stub dated November 21, 2017, bearingcheck number 002980, and kept or maintained by theTrump Organization.The thirty-second count pertains to an invoice from MichaelCohen dated December 1, 2017, marked as a record ofDonald J. Trump, and kept or maintained by the TrumpOrganization.Page 39

The thirty-third count pertains to an entry in the DetailGeneral Ledger for Donald J. Trump, dated December 1,2017, bearing voucher number 877785, and kept ormaintained by the Trump Organization.The Thirty Fourth Count is also Falsifying BusinessRecords in the First Degree but as it pertains to a checkand check stub dated December 5, 2017. I will nowrepeat for you the law pertaining to the crime of FalsifyingBusiness Records in the First Degree in its entirety.FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDSIN THE FIRST DEGREEPenal Law § 175.10Under our law, a person is guilty of Falsifying BusinessRecords in the First Degree when, with intent to defraud thatincludes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or concealthe commission thereof, thatperson:makes or causes a false entry in the business records ofan enterprise.The following terms used in that definition have a specialmeaning:ENTERPRISE means any entity of one or more persons,corporate or otherwise, public or private, engaged in business,commercial, professional, industrial, social, political orgovernmental activity.BUSINESS RECORD means any writing or article,including computer data or a computer program, kept ormaintained by an enterprise for the purpose of evidencing orreflecting its condition or activity.Page 40

INTENT means conscious objective or purpose. Thus, aperson acts with intent to defraud when his or her consciousobjective or purpose is to do so.Intent does not require premeditation. In other words, intentdoes not require advance planning. Nor is it necessary that theintent be in a person's mind for any particular period of time. Theintent can be formed, and need only exist, at the very momentthe person engages in prohibited conduct or acts to cause theprohibited result, and not at any earlier time.The question naturally arises as to how to determinewhether a defendant had the intent required for the commissionof a crime.To make that determination in this case, you must decideif the required intent can be inferred beyond a reasonable doubtfrom the proven facts.In doing so, you may consider the person's conduct and allof the circ*mstances surrounding that conduct, including, but notlimited to, the following:what, if anything, did the person do or say;what result, if any, followed the person's conduct; andwas that result the natural, necessary and probableconsequence of that conduct.Therefore, in this case, from the facts you find to have beenproven, decide whether you can infer beyond a reasonable doubtthat the defendant had the intent required for the commission ofthis crime.Page 41

INTENT TO DEFRAUDAs I previously explained, a person acts with intent todefraud when his or her conscious objective or purpose is to doSO.In order to prove an intent to defraud, the People need notprove that the defendant acted with the intent to defraud anyparticular person or entity. A general intent to defraud any personor entity suffices.Intent to defraud is also not constricted to an intent todeprive another of property or money and can extend beyondeconomic concerns.INTENT TO COMMIT OR CONCEAL ANOTHER CRIMEFor the count of Falsifying Business Records in the FirstDegree, the intent to defraud must include an intent to commitanother crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.Under our law, although the People must prove an intentto commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commissionthereof, they need not prove that the other crime was in factcommitted, aided, or concealed.Page 42

NEW YORK ELECTION LAW § 17-152 PREDICATEThe People allege that the other crime the defendantintended to commit, aid, or conceal is a violation of New YorkElection Law section 17-152.Section 17-152 of the New York Election Law provides thatany two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent theelection of any person to a public office by unlawful means andwhich conspiracy is acted upon by one or more of the partiesthereto, shall be guilty of conspiracy to promote or prevent anelection.Under our law, a person is guilty of such a conspiracywhen, with intent that conduct be performed that would promoteor prevent the election of a person to public office by unlawfulmeans, he or she agrees with one or more persons to engage inor cause the performance of such conduct.Knowledge of a conspiracy does not by itself make thedefendant a coconspirator. The defendant must intend thatconduct be performed that would promote or prevent the electionof a person to public office by unlawful means. Intent meansconscious objective or purpose. Thus, a person acts with theintent that conduct be performed that would promote or preventthe election of a person to public office by unlawful means whenhis or her conscious objective or purpose is that such conduct beperformed.Evidence that defendant was present when others agreedto engage in the performance of a crime does not by itself showthat he personally agreed to engage in the conspiracy.Page 43

"By Unlawful Means"Although you must conclude unanimously that thedefendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of anyperson to a public office by unlawful means, you need not beunanimous as to what those unlawful means were.In determining whether the defendant conspired topromote or prevent the election of any person to a public officeby unlawful means, you may consider the following unlawfulmeans: (1) violations of the Federal Election Campaign Actotherwise known as FECA; (2) the falsification of other businessrecords; or (3) violation of tax laws.THE FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACTThe first of the People's theories of “unlawful means" whichI will now define for you is the Federal Election Campaign Act.Under the Federal Election Campaign Act, it is unlawful foran individual to willfully make a contribution to any candidate withrespect to any election for federal office, including the office ofPresident of the United States, which exceeds a certain limit. In2015 and 2016, that limit was $2,700. It is also unlawful underthe Federal Election Campaign Act for any corporation to willfullymake a contribution of any amount to a candidate or candidate'scampaign in connection with any federal election, or for anyperson to cause such a corporate contribution. For purposes ofthese prohibitions, an expenditure made in cooperation,consultation, or concert with, or at the request or suggestion of,a candidate or his agents shall be considered to be a contributionto such candidate.Page 44

The terms CONTRIBUTION and EXPENDITURE includeanything of value, including any purchase, payment, loan, oradvance, made by any person for the purpose of influencing anyelection for federal office.Under federal law, a third party's payment of a candidate'sexpenses is deemed to be a contribution to the candidate unlessthe payment would have been made irrespective of thecandidacy.If the payment would have been made even in theabsence of the candidacy, the payment should not be treated asa contribution.FECA's definitions of "contribution" and "expenditure" donot include any cost incurred in covering or carrying a news story,commentary, or editorial by a magazine, periodical publication,or similar press entity, so long as such activity is a normal,legitimate press function. This is called the press exemption.For example, the term legitimate press function includessolicitation letters seeking new subscribers to a publication.FALSIFICATION OF OTHER BUSINESS RECORDSThe People's second theory of "unlawful means" which Iwill define for you is the falsification of other business records.Under New York law, a person is guilty of Falsifying.Business Records in the Second Degree when with intent todefraud, he or she makes or causes a false entry in the businessrecords of an enterprise.I previously defined for you the terms enterprise, businessrecords, and intent to defraud.Page 45

For purposes of determining whether Falsifying BusinessRecords in the Second Degree was an unlawful means used bya conspiracy to promote or prevent an election here, you mayconsider: (i) the bank records associated with Michael Cohen'saccount formation paperwork for the Resolution Consultants LLCand Essential Consultants LLC accounts; (ii) the bank recordsassociated with Michael Cohen's wire to Keith Davidson; (iii) theinvoice from Investor Advisory Services Inc. to ResolutionConsultants LLC; and (iv) the 1099-MISC forms that the TrumpOrganization issued to Michael Cohen.VIOLATION OF TAX LAWSThe People's third theory of "unlawful means" which I willdefine for you is a Violation of Tax Laws.Under New York State and New York City law, it is unlawfulto knowingly supply or submit materially false or fraudulentinformation in connection with any tax return.Likewise, under federal law, it is unlawful for a person towillfully make any tax return, statement, or other document thatis fraudulent or false as to any material matter, or that the persondoes not believe to be true and correct as to every materialmatter.Under these federal, state, and local laws, such conduct isunlawful even if it does not result in underpayment of taxes.Page 46

In order for you to find the defendant guilty of the crime ofFalsifying Business Records in the First Degree under Count 34,the People are required to prove, from all of the evidence in thecase, beyond a reasonable doubt, each of the following twoelements:1. That on or about December 5, 2017, in the county ofNew York and elsewhere, the defendant, personally, orby acting in concert with another person or persons,made or caused a false entry in the business records ofan enterprise, specifically, a Donald J. Trump accountcheck and check stub dated December 5, 2017, bearingcheck number 003006, and kept or maintained by theTrump Organization; and2. That the defendant did so with intent to defraud thatincluded an intent to commit another crime or to aid orconceal the commission thereof.If you find the People have proven beyond a reasonabledoubt both of those two elements, you must find the defendantguilty of this crime.If you find the People have not proven beyond areasonable doubt either one or both of those two elements, youmust find the defendants not guilty of this crime.Page 47

Motive When Not Element of CrimeLet me now explain motive, and in particular, the differencebetween motive and intent.Intent means conscious objective or purpose. Thus, aperson commits a criminal act with intent when that person'sconscious objective or purpose is to engage in the act which thelaw forbids or to bring about an unlawful result.Motive, on the other hand, is the reason why a personchooses to engage in criminal conduct.If intent is an element of a charged crime, that elementmust be proved by the People beyond a reasonable doubt.this case, intent is, as I have explained, an element of the crimeof Falsifying Business Records in the First degree.Motive, however, is not an element of the crimes charged.Therefore, the People are not required to prove a motive for thecommission of the charged crimes.Nevertheless, evidence of a motive, or evidence of the lackof a motive, may be considered by the jury.For example, if you find from the evidence that thedefendant had a motive to commit the crime charged, that is acirc*mstance you may wish to consider as tending to support afinding of guilt.On the other hand, if the proof establishes that thedefendant had no motive to commit the crime charged, that is acirc*mstance you may wish to consider as tending to establishthat the defendant is not guilty of the crime charged.Page 48

DeliberationsYour verdict, on each count you consider, whether guilty ornot guilty, must be unanimous; that is, each and every juror mustagree to it.To reach a unanimous verdict you must deliberate with theother jurors. That means you should discuss the evidence andconsult with each other, listen to each other, give each other'sviews careful consideration, and reason together whenconsidering the evidence. And when you deliberate, you shoulddo so with a view towards reaching an agreement if that can bedone without surrendering individual judgment.Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but onlyafter a fair and impartial consideration of the evidence with theother jurors. You should not surrender an honest view of theevidence simply because you want the trial to end, or becauseyou are outvoted. At the same time, you should not hesitate toreexamine your views and change your mind if you becomeconvinced that your position was not correct.Page 49

Jury Note TakingSome jurors took notes.Any notes taken are only an aid to your memory and mustnot take precedence over your independent recollection.Those jurors who chose not to take notes must rely on theirown independent recollection and must not be influenced by anynotes that another juror may have taken.Any notes you took are only for your own personal use inrefreshing your recollection.A juror's notes are not a substitute for the recordedtranscript of the testimony or for any exhibit received in evidence.If there is a discrepancy between a juror's recollection and his orher notes regarding the evidence, you should ask to have therelevant testimony read back or the exhibit produced in the juryroom.In addition, a juror's notes are not a substitute for thedetailed explanation I have given you of the principles of law thatgovern this case. If there is a discrepancy between a juror'srecollection and his or her notes regarding those principles, youshould ask me to explain those principles again, and I will behappy to do so.Page 50

Exhibits, Readback & Law QuestionsYou may see any or all of the exhibits that were receivedin evidence. Simply write me a note telling me which exhibit orexhibits you want to see.You may also have the testimony of any witness read backto you in whole or in part. Again, if you want a read back, writeme a note telling me what testimony you wish to hear.If you are interested in hearing only a portion of a witness'testimony, please specify in your note which witness and, with asmuch detail as possible, which part of the testimony you want tohear.Of course, when testimony is read back, questions to whichan objection was sustained and material otherwise struck fromthe record is not read back.If you have a question on the law, write me a notespecifying what you want me to review with you.Page 51

Foreperson's RoleUnder our law, the first juror selected is known as theforeperson. During deliberations, the foreperson's opinion andvote are not entitled to any more importance than that of anyother juror.What we ask the foreperson to do during deliberations is tosign any written note that the jury sends to the court. Theforeperson does not have to write the note or agree with itscontents. The foreperson's signature indicates only that thewriting comes from the jury.The foreperson may also chair the jury's discussions duringdeliberations.When the jury has reached a verdict, guilty or not guilty, theentire jury will be asked to come into court. The foreperson willbe asked whether the jury has reached a verdict. If theforeperson says yes, the foreperson will then be asked what theverdict is for each charged count.After that, the entire jury will be asked whether that is theirverdict and will answer yes or no.Finally, upon the request of a party, each juror will be askedindividually whether the announced verdict is the verdict of thatjuror, and upon being asked, each juror will answer yes or no.Page 52

Verdict SheetTheI will give you a form known as a verdict sheet.verdict sheet lists each count submitted for your considerationand the possible verdicts. Please use the form to record yourverdict with an X or a check mark in the appropriate place.In addition to listing the counts, I have added someadditional language on the verdict sheet in order to distinguishthe counts:You will notice that I have indicated whether a countpertains to an invoice, a voucher or a check.For the invoices, I have added the date and for thevouchers and checks I have added the number.The sole reason for doing this is to help you distinguishbetween the various counts. It is not a substitute for my fullinstructions on the meaning and elements of each charge, and itshould not discourage you from asking me to define a crimeagain if a question about it arises.Page 53

Jury Deliberation RulesFinally, there are a few remaining rules which you must observe during yourdeliberations.1. While you are here in the courthouse, deliberating on the case, you will be kepttogether in the jury room. You may not leave the jury room during deliberations. Lunchwill of course be provided. If you have a cell phone or other electronic device, pleasegive it to a court officer to hold for you while you are engaged in deliberations.2. You must deliberate about the case only when you are all gathered togetherin the jury room. You must not, for example, discuss the case as you go to and fromthe courtroom. It is important that each juror have the opportunity to hear whateveranother juror has to say about the case, and that by law must only be done when youare all gathered together in the jury room. Thus, if for any reason, all twelve of you arenot gathered together in the jury room, please stop deliberating until you are all present.3. During your deliberations, you must discuss the case only among yourselves;you must not discuss the case with anyone else, including a court officer, or permitanyone other than a fellow juror to discuss the case in your presence.4. If you have a question or request, you must communicate with me by writinga note, which you will give to a court officer to give to me. The law requires that youcommunicate with me in writing in part to make sure there are no misunderstandings.5. We will work every day until about 4:30. However, we can work later if thejury wishes to do so and all the jurors are in agreement. Simply send me a note as earlyin the day as possible and let me know that you wish to stay beyond 4:30 and if so, whattime you would like to work until. Depending on the time you select, we may orderdinner for you.I should explain that, under our law, I am not permitted to have a conversationabout the facts of the case, or a possible verdict, or the vote of the jury on any count withany one juror, or group of jurors, or even all the jurors. Thus, in any note that you sendme, do not tell me what the vote of the jury is on any count.

If a juror wants to speak to me during deliberations, a meeting here in thecourtroom with the parties will be arranged. No juror, however, can tell me whatis being said about the facts of the case, or a possible verdict, or what the vote ofany juror or the jury is on any count. And, while I will of course listen to whatevera juror has to say that does not involve those subjects, I may not be able to respondto that juror if the response involves instructions on the law. I may be required tocall into court the entire jury and respond by speaking to the entire jury. Thereason for that is that our law wants to make sure that each and every juror hears,at exactly the same time, whatever I have to say about the law, and our law wantsto make sure that the jury hears those instructions from me and not from anotherjuror.That concludes my instructions on the law.