Transcript of Trump Manhattan Trial, May 29, 2024 (2024)

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKCOUNTY OF NEW YORK CRIMINAL TERM-THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,PART: 59Indict. No.71543-2023CHARGE-against-DONALD J. TRUMP,DEFENDANT.BEFORE:4815FALSIFYING BUSINESSRECORDS 1ST DEGREEJURY TRIALX100 Centre StreetNew York, New York 10013May 29, 2024HONORABLE JUAN M. MERCHANJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURTAPPEARANCES:FOR THEPEOPLE:ALVIN BRAGG, JR.,ESQ.DISTRICT ATTORNEY, NEW YORK COUNTYOne Hogan PlaceNew York, New York 10013BY:JOSHUA STEINGLASS, ESQ.MATTHEW COLANGELO,ESQ.SUSAN HOFFINGER, ESQ.CHRISTOPHER CONROY, ESQ.BECKY MANGOLD, ESQ.KATHERINE ELLIS, ESQ.Assistant District AttorneysBLANCHE LAWBY:TODD BLANCHE, ESQ.EMIL BOVE, ESQ.KENDRA WHARTON, ESQ.NECHELES LAW, LLPBY: SUSAN NECHELES, ESQ.Attorneys for the DefendantSUSAN PEARCE-BATES, RPR, CSR, RSAPrincipal Court ReporterLAURIE EISENBERG, RPR, CSRLISA KRAMSKYTHERESA MAGNICCARISenior Court ReportersSusan Pearce-Bates,RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

12345७SERGEANT:Jury ChargeAll rise.4816Part 59 is now in session. The Honorable JuanMerchan presiding.THE CLERK: This is The People of the State ofNew York against Donald J. Trump. Indictment 71543 of2023.789101112Appearances starting with the People, please.MR. STEINGLASS: For the People, ADAS JoshuaSteinglass, Matthew Coangelo, Susan Hoffinger, BeckyMangold, Christopher Conroy and Katherine Ellis.Good morning.THE COURT: Good morning.MR. BLANCHE: Todd Blanche, and I am joined byEmil Bove, Susan Necheles and Kendra Wharton on behalf ofPresident Trump to my left.1314151617181920212223Defense.2425Good morning.THE COURT: Good morning.Good morning, Mr. Trump.I believe that you were both presented with theproposed verdict sheet and I see that, Mr. Steinglass, youinitialed it on behalf of the People.Mr. Bove, you initialed it on behalf of theIs that right?MR. BLANCHE:Yes.MR. STEINGLASS:Yes.Susan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

12345७Jury Charge4817THE COURT:Anything that we need to go overbefore we bring at jury out?MR.STEINGLASS: Very briefly.As we were comparing a verdict sheet to thecharge, we noticed a minor omission.On Page 40, for the 34th Count to be consistentwith the other counts, we believe it should say after the78date, bearing check number 003006.91011THE COURT: That was for the 34th Count, right?MR.STEINGLASS: Yes, Judge.Thank you.12THE COURT:Anything else?13141516171819202122232425All right.Let's get the jury, please.SERGEANT: All rise.Jury entering.(Whereupon, the jurors entered the courtroomand were properly seated.)THE COURT: You may be seated.THE CLERK: Do all parties stipulate that alljurors are present and properly seated?MR. STEINGLASS: Yes.MR. BLANCHE: Yes.THE CLERK: Thank you.THE COURT: Good morning, Jurors.Susan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

Jury Charge481812Members of the Jury, I will now instruct you onthe law. I will first review the general principles of law3that apply to this case and all criminal cases.4516You have heard me explain some of thoseprinciples at the beginning of the trial. I am sure youcan appreciate the benefits of repeating those instructionsat this stage of the proceedings.Next, I will define the crimes charged in thiscase, explain the law that applies to those definitions andspell out the elements of the charged crimes.78910111213141516171819202122232425Finally, I will outline the process of jurydeliberations.These instructions will take about an hour, andyou will not receive copies of them. You may however,request that I read them back to you in whole or in part asmany times as you wish, and I will be happy to do so.During these instructions, I will not summarizethe evidence. If it is necessary, I may refer to portionsof the evidence to explain the law that relates to it. Myreference to evidence, or my decision not to refer toevidence, expresses no opinion about the truthfulness,accuracy or importance of any particular evidence.In fact, nothing I have said in the course ofthis trial was meant to suggest that I have an opinionabout this case. If you have formed an impression that ISusan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

Jury Charge4819123do have an opinion, you must put it out of your mind anddisregard it.The level of my voice or intonation may vary4during these instructions.If I do that, it is done to516help you to understand.opinion about the law or the facts of the case or ofwhether the Defendant is guilty or not guilty.It is not done to communicate anyIt is not my responsibility to judge the evidenceIt is yours. You are the judges of the facts, andyou are responsible for deciding whether the Defendant isguilty or not guilty.789here.101112131415161718192021Remember, you have promised to be a fair juror.A fair juror is a person who will simply keep their promiseto be fair and impartial and who will not permit theverdict to be influenced by bias or prejudice in favor ofor against the person who appeared in this trial on accountof that person's race, color, national origin, ancestry,gender, gender identity or expression, religion, religiouspractice, age, disability or sexual orientation.And further, a fair juror must be mindful of anystereotypes, attitudes about people or about groups ofpeople that the juror may have and must not allow thosestereotypes or attitudes to affect their verdict.22232425unconscious views on many subjects.As I have explained, we all develop and holdSome of thoseSusan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

Jury Charge482012345७789unconscious views may come from stereotypes and attitudesabout people or groups of people that may impact on aperson's thinking and decision-making without that personeven knowing it.As a juror, you are asked to make a veryimportant decision about another member of the community.I know you would not want to make that decisionbased on such stereotypes or attitudes, that is, on what wecall implicit biases and it would be wrong for you to do10So.111213141516171819202122A fair juror must guard against the impact ofsuch stereotypes or attitudes. You can do this by askingyourselves during your deliberations whether your views andconclusions would be different if the Defendant, witnessesor others that you have heard about or seen in court wereof a different race, color, national origin, ancestry,gender, gender identity or expression, religious practice,age or sexual orientation, or if they did not have adisability.If the answer is yes, then, in keeping with yourpromise to be fair, reconsider your views and conclusionsalong with the other jurors, and make sure your verdict is23based on evidence and not on stereotypes or attitudes.24Justice requires no less.25Jurors, you will recall that during jurySusan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

Jury Charge७7891048211selection you agreed that you would set aside any personal2opinions or bias you might have in favor of or against the345Defendant, and that you would decide this case fairly onthe evidence and on the law.Again, I direct you to decide this case on theevidence and the law as it relates to the Defendant here ontrial.You must set aside any personal opinions or biasyou might have in favor of or against the Defendant, andyou must not allow any such opinions to influence your11verdict.12Remember, also, in your deliberations, you may131415161718192021222324not consider or speculate about matters relating tosentence or punishment. If there is a verdict of guilty,it will be my responsibility to impose an appropriatesentence.When you judge the facts, you are to consideronly the evidence.The evidence in this case includes:The testimony of the witnesses, the exhibits thatwere received in evidence, and the stipulations agreed toby the parties.Remember, a stipulation is information theparties have agreed to present to the jury as evidence,25without calling a witness to testify.Susan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

Jury Charge4822Testimony which was stricken from the record orto which an objection was sustained must be disregarded by123you.45७78910111213141516171819202122232425Exhibits that were received in evidence, areavailable, upon your request, for your inspection andconsideration.Exhibits that were just seen during the trial, ormarked for identification but not received in evidence, arenot evidence, and are thus not available for yourinspection and consideration.Testimony based upon those exhibits that were notreceived in evidence may be considered by you. It is justthe exhibit itself is not available for your inspection andthat may not be considered.In evaluating the evidence, you may consider anyfact that is proven and any inference which may be drawnfrom such fact.To draw an inference means to infer, find,conclude that a fact exists or does not exist based uponproof of some other fact or facts.So, for example, suppose you go to bed one nightand it is not raining, and when you wake up in the morning,you look out your window. You do not see rain, but you seethat the street and sidewalk are wet, and that people arewearing raincoats and carrying umbrellas.Under thoseSusan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

Jury Charge482311121314123451678910circ*mstances, it may be reasonable to infer, and that isconclude, that it rained during the night.In other words, the fact of it having rainedwhile you were asleep is an inference that might be drawnfrom the proven facts of the presence of the water on thestreet and sidewalk, and people in raincoats and carryingumbrellas.An inference must only by drawn from a provenfact or facts, and then, only if the inference flowsnaturally, reasonably and logically from the proven fact orfacts, not if it is speculative.Therefore, in deciding whether to draw thaninference, you must look at and consider all the facts inlight of reason, common sense, and experience.151617As you know, certain exhibits were admitted intoevidence with some portions blacked out or redacted. Thoseredactions were made to remove personal identifying1819202122232425information and to ensure that only relevant admissibleevidence was put before you.You may not speculate as to what material wasredacted or why, and you may not draw any inference,favorable or unfavorable against either party, from thefact that certain material has been redacted.You may recall that I instructed you severaltimes during the trial that certain exhibits were beingSusan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

Jury Charge48241accepted into evidence for a limited purpose only, and that2you were not to consider that evidence for any other34516purpose.Under the law we refer to that as a limitinginstruction. I will now remind you of some of the limitinginstructions you were given during that trial.You will recall that you heard testimony thatwhile David Pecker was an executive at AMI, AMI enteredinto a Non-Prosecution Agreement with Federal prosecutors,as well as the Conciliation Agreement with the FederalElection Commission, the FEC. I remind you that evidencewas permitted to assist you, the jury, in assessing DavidPecker's credibility and to help provide context for some789101112131415for those purposes only.16of the surrounding events.You may consider that testimony171819Neither the Non-Prosecution Agreement, nor theConciliation Agreement is evidence of the Defendant'sguilt, and you may not consider them in determining whetherthe Defendant is guilty or not guilty of the charged20crimes.2122232425You also heard testimony that the FederalElection Commission conducted an investigation into thepayment to Stormy Daniels and of responses submitted byMichael Cohen and his attorneys to the investigation.evidence was permitted to assist you, the jury, inThatSusan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

Jury Charge48251assessing Michael Cohen's credibility and to help provide2context for some of the surrounding events.You may3consider that evidence for those purposes only.45७78910Likewise, you will recall that you heardtestimony that Michael Cohen pled guilty to violating theFederal Election Campaign Act, otherwise known a FECA. Iremind you that evidence was permitted to assist you, thejury, in assessing Mr. Cohen's credibility as a witness andto help provide context for some of the events thatfollowed. You may consider that testimony for thosepurposes, only.Neither the fact of the FEC investigation, Mr.Cohen and his attorney's responses or the fact that Mr.Cohen pleaded guilty, constitutes evidence of theDefendant's guilt and you may not consider them indetermining whether the Defendant is guilty or not guiltyof the charged crimes.You will recall that certain Wall Street Journalnews articles were accepted into evidence during the trial.I remind you now that the articles were accepted and may beconsidered by you for the limited purpose of demonstratingthat the articles were published on or about a certain dateand to provide context for the other evidence.The exhibits may not be considered by you asevidence that any of the assertions contained in the111213141516171819202122232425Susan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

Jury Charge4826There were other exhibits which contained hearsay1articles is actually true.2345७78910111213141516171819202122232425and were not accepted for the truth of the matter assertedbut for another purpose.For example, there were several National Enquirerheadlines and an invoice from Investor Advisory Serviceswhich is People's 161 in evidence. Those were accepted forthe limited purpose of demonstrating that the articles werepublished and the document created.There were also some text messages that wereaccepted with a similar limitation.For example, People's Exhibit 171-A with respectto Gina Rodriguez's texts only and 257 with respect toChris Cuomo's texts only.Those text messages were accepted for the limitedpurpose of providing context for the responses by DylanHoward and Michael Cohen.The exhibits which were accepted into evidencewith a limiting instruction are 152, 153-A, 153-B, 153-C,161, 171-A, 180, 181 and 257.If you have any additional questions or needclarification as to which exhibits were accepted intoevidence with limitations, just send me a note with yourquestion and I will be happy to clarify.We now turn to the fundamental principles of ourSusan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

Jury Charge482712law that apply in all criminal trials: The presumption ofinnocence, the burden of proof and the requirement of proof3451678910111213141516171819202122232425beyond a reasonable doubt.Throughout these proceedings, the Defendant ispresumed to be innocent. As a result, you must find theDefendant not guilty, unless, on the evidence presented atthis trial, you conclude that the People have proven theDefendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.In determining whether the People have satisfiedtheir burden of proving the Defendant's quilt beyond areasonable doubt, you may consider all of the evidencepresented, whether by the People or by the Defendant.In doing so, however, remember that, even thoughthe Defendant introduced evidence, the burden of proofremains on the People.The fact that the Defendant did not testify isnot a factor from which any inference unfavorable to theDefendant may be drawn.The Defendant is not required to prove that he isnot guilty. In fact, the Defendant is not required toprove or disprove anything. To the contrary, the Peoplehave the burden of proving the Defendant guilty beyond areasonable doubt. That means, before you can find theDefendant guilty of a crime, the People must prove beyond areasonable doubt every element of the crime including thatSusan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

12345167891011Jury Charge4828the Defendant is the person who committed that crime.The burden of proof never shifts from the Peopleto the Defendant.If the People failed to satisfy their burden ofproof, you must find the Defendant not guilty, and if thePeople satisfy their burden of proof you must find theDefendant guilty.What does our law mean when it requires proof ofguilt beyond a reasonable doubt?The law uses the term of proof beyond areasonable doubt to tell you how convincing the evidence ofguilt must be to permit a verdict of guilty.The law recognizes that in dealing with humanaffairs, there are very few things in this world that weknow with absolute certainty. Therefore, the law does notrequire the People to prove a defendant guilty beyond allpossible doubt.On the other hand, it is not sufficient to provethat the Defendant is probably guilty. In a criminal case,the proof of guilt must be stronger than that. It must bebeyond a reasonable doubt.A reasonable doubt is an honest doubt of theDefendant's guilt for which a reason exists based upon thenature and the quality of the evidence. It is an actualdoubt, not an imaginary doubt. It is a doubt that a1213141516171819202122232425Susan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

Jury Charge12345७78910111213144829reasonable person, acting in a matter of this importancewould be likely to entertain because of the evidence thatwas presented or because of the lack of convincingevidence.Proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is proofthat leaves you so firmly convinced of the Defendant'squilt that you have no reasonable doubt of the existence ofany element of the crime or of the Defendant's identity asthe person who committed the 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 theevidence.After carefully evaluating the evidence, each ofyou must decide whether that evidence convinces you beyonda reasonable doubt of the Defendant's guilt.Whatever your verdict may be, it must not restupon baseless speculation. Nor may it be influenced in anyway by bias, prejudice, sympathy, or by a desire to bringan end to your deliberations or to avoid an unpleasant15161718192021222324If you are not convinced beyond a reasonabledoubt that the Defendant is guilty of a charged crime, youmust find the Defendant not guilty of that crime, and if25you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that theduty.Susan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

12345७Jury Charge4830Defendant is guilty of a charged crime, you must find theDefendant guilty of that crime.As judges of the facts, you alone determine thetruthfulness and accuracy of the testimony of each witness.You must decide whether a witness has told thetruth and was accurate, or instead, testified falsely orwas mistaken.You must also decide what importance to give tothe testimony you accept as truthful and accurate. It isthe quality of the testimony that is controlling, not thenumber of witnesses who testified.If you find that any witness has intentionallytestified falsely as to any material fact, you maydisregard that witness's entire testimony.Or, you maydisregard so much of it as you find was untruthful, andaccept so much of it as you find to have been truthful andaccurate.There 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 thetruthfulness and accuracy of statements made to you byother people. The same factors used to make thosedecisions, should be used in this case when evaluatingtestimony.78910111213141516171819202122232425Susan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

12345७78910Jury Charge4831Some of the factors that you may wish to considerin evaluating testimony of a witness are as follows:Did the witness have an opportunity to see orhear the events about which he or she testified?Did the witness have the ability to recall thoseevents accurately?Was the testimony of the witness plausible andlikely to be true, or was it implausible and not likely tobe true?Was the testimony of the witness consistent orinconsistent with other testimony or evidence in the case?Did the manner in which the witness testifiedreflect upon the truthfulness of that witness's testimony?To what extent, if any, did the witness'sbackground, training, education or experience affect thebelievability of that witness's testimony.Did the witness have a conscious bias, hostilitysome other attitude that affected the truthfulness ofthe witness's testimony?Did the witness show an, unconscious bias, thatis, a bias that the witness may have even unknowinglyacquired from stereotypes and attitudes about people orgroups of people, and if so, did that unconscious biasimpact that witness's ability to be truthful and accurate.You may consider whether a witness had, or did1112131415161718or19202122232425Susan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

Jury Charge4832If I witness had a motive to lie, you may1not have, a motive to lie.2345७78910111213141516171819202122232425consider whether and to what extent, if any, that motiveaffected the truthfulness of that witness's testimony.If a witness did not have a motive to lie, youmay consider that as well in evaluating the witness'struthfulness.You may consider whether a witness hopes for orexpects to receive a benefit for testifying. If so, youmay consider whether and to what extent it affected thetruthfulness of the witness's testimony.You may consider whether a witness has anyinterest in the outcome of the case, or instead, whetherthe witness has no such interest.You are not required to reject the testimony ofan interested witness, or to accept the testimony of awitness who has no interest in the outcome of the case.You may, however, consider whether an interest inthe outcome, or the lack of such interest, affected thetruthfulness of the witness's testimony.You may consider whether a witness has beenconvicted of a crime or has engaged in criminal conduct,and if so, whether and to what extent it affects yourevaluation of the truthfulness of that witness's testimony.You are not required to reject the testimony of aSusan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

Jury Charge48331witness who has been convicted of a crime or who has23engaged in criminal conduct, or to accept the testimony ofa witness who has not.4You may, however, consider whether a witness's5७78910111213141516171819202122232425criminal conviction or conduct has affected thetruthfulness of the witness's testimony.You may consider whether a witness madestatements at this trial that are inconsistent with eachother.You may also consider whether a witness madeprevious statements that are inconsistent with his or hertestimony at trial.You may consider whether a witness testified to afact here at trial that the witness omitted to state at aprior time, when it would have been reasonable and logicalfor the witness to have stated that fact. In determiningwhether it would have been reasonable and logical for thewitness to have stated the omitted fact, you may considerwhether the witness's attention was called to the matter,and whether the witness was specifically asked about it.If a witness has made such inconsistentstatements or omissions, you may consider whether and towhat extent they affect the truthfulness or accuracy ofthat witness's testimony here at this trial.The contents of a prior inconsistent statementSusan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

Jury Charge48341are not proof of what happened. You may use evidence of a2prior inconsistent statement only to evaluate the345७78910truthfulness or accuracy of the witness's testimony here attrial.You may consider whether a witness's testimony isconsistent with the testimony of other witnesses or withother evidence in the case.If there were inconsistencies by or amongwitnesses, you may consider whether they were significantinconsistencies related to important facts, or instead werethe kind of minor inconsistencies that one might expectfrom multiple witnesses to the same event.You have heard testimony about the prosecutionand defense counsel speaking to a witness about the casebefore the witness testified at this trial.111213141516171819202122232425witness to do so.The law permits the prosecution and defensecounsel to speak to a witness about the case before thewitness testifies, and the law permits the prosecutor anddefense counsel to review with the witness the questionsthat will or may be asked at trial, including the questionsthat may be asked on cross-examination.You have also heard testimony that a witness reador reviewed certain materials pertaining to this casebefore the witness testified at trial. The law permits aSusan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

12345७Jury Charge4835Speaking to a witness about his or her testimonyand permitting the witness to review materials pertainingto the case before the witness testifies is a normal partof preparing for trial.It is not improper as long as it is not suggestedthat the witness depart from the truth.78910The People have the burden of proving beyond areasonable doubt, not only that a charged crime wascommitted, but that the Defendant is the person whocommitted that crime.111213141516171819202122232425Thus, even if you are convinced beyond areasonable doubt that a charged crime was committed bysomeone, you cannot convict the Defendant of that crimeunless your also convinced beyond a reasonable doubt thathe is the person who committed that crime.Under our law, Michael Cohen is an accomplicebecause there is evidence that he participated in a crimebased upon conduct involved in the allegations here againstthe Defendant.Our law is especially concerned about thetestimony of an accomplice who implicates another in thecommission of a crime, particularly when the accomplice hasreceived, expects or hopes for a benefit in return for histestimony.Therefore, our law provides that a defendant maySusan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

Jury Charge4836123not be convicted of any crime upon the testimony of anaccomplice, unless it is supported by corroborativeevidence tending to connect the Defendant with the45७78910111213141516171819202122232425commission of that crime.In other words, even if you find the testimony ofMichael Cohen to be believable, you may not convict theDefendant solely upon that testimony unless you also findthat it was corroborated by other evidence tending toconnect the Defendant with the commission of the crime.The corroborative evidence need not, by itself,prove that a crime was committed or that the Defendant isguilty. What the law requires is that there be evidencethat tends to connect the Defendant with the commission ofthe crime charged in such a way as may reasonably satisfyyou that the accomplice is telling the truth about theDefendant'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 MichaelCohen, which itself tends to connect the Defendant to thecommission of the crime.You may also consider whether there is material,believable evidence, apart from the testimony of MichaelCohen, which, while it does not itself tend to connect theDefendant with the commission of the crime charged, itSusan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

Jury Charge48371nonetheless so harmonizes with the narrative of the23accomplice as to satisfy you that the accomplice is tellingthe truth about the Defendant's participation in the crime4and thereby tends to connect the Defendant to the516commission of the crime.I will now instruct you on the law applicable tothe charged offenses. That offense is falsifying businessrecords in the first degree, 34 counts.Our law recognizes that two or more individualscan act jointly to commit a crime, and that in certaincirc*mstances, each can be held criminally liable for theacts of the others. In that situation, those persons canbe said to be, acting in concert with each other.Our law defines the circ*mstance under which oneperson may be criminally liable for the conduct of another.That definition is as follows:When one person engages in conduct whichconstitutes an offense, another is criminally liable forsuch conduct when, acting with the state of mind requiredfor the commission of that offense, he or she solicits,requests, commands, importunes, or intentionally aids suchperson to engage in such conduct.Under that definition, mere presence at the sceneof a crime, even with knowledge that the crime was takingplace, or mere association with a perpetrator of a crime,78910111213141516171819202122232425Susan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

12345७789101112131415Jury Charge4838does not by itself make a defendant criminally liable forthat crime.In order for the Defendant to be held criminallyliable for the conduct of another which constitutes anoffense, you must find beyond a reasonable doubt:First, that he solicited, requested, commandedimportuned, or intentionally aided that person to engage inthat conduct.And second, that he did so with the state of mindrequired for the commission of the offense.If it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt thatthe Defendant is criminally liable for the conduct ofanother, the extent or degree of the defendant'sparticipation in the crime does to the matter.A defendant proven beyond a reasonable doubt tobe criminally liable for the conduct of another in thecommission of crime is as guilty of the crime as if theDefendant, personally, had committed every act constitutingthat crime.The People have the burden of proving beyond areasonable doubt that the Defendant acted in the state ofmind required for the commission of the crime, and eitherpersonally, or by acting in concert with another person,committed each of the remaining elements of the crime.Your verdict on each count you consider, whether16171819202122232425Susan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

12345७Jury Charge4839guilty or not guilty, must be unanimous. In order to findthe Defendant guilty, however, you need not be unanimous onwhether the Defendant committed the crime personally, or byacting in concert with another, or both.The First Count is falsifying business records inthe first degree:Under our law, a person is guilty of falsifyingbusiness records in the first degree when, with intent todefraud that includes an intent to commit another crime orto aid or conceal the commission thereof, that person:Makes or causes a false entry in the businessrecords of an enterprise.The following terms used in that definition havea special meaning under our law:Enterprise means any entity of one or morepersons, corporate or otherwise, public or private, engagedin business, commercial, professional, industrial, social,political or governmental activity.Business record means any writing or article,including computer data or a computer program, kept ormaintained by an enterprise for the purpose of evidencingor reflecting its condition or activity.Intent means conscious objective or purpose.Thus, a person acts with intent to defraud whenhis or her conscious objective or purpose is to do so.78910111213141516171819202122232425Susan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

12345७Jury Charge4840Intent does not require premeditation.words, intent does not require advance planning.In otherNor is itnecessary that the intent be in a person's mind for anyparticular period of time.The intent can be formed, and need only exist, atthe very moment the person engages in prohibited conduct oracts to cause the prohibited result, and not at any earlierThe question naturally arises as to how todetermine whether a defendant had the intent required forthe commission of a crime.To make that determination in this case, you mustdecide if the required intent can be inferred beyond areasonable doubt from the proven facts.78time.91011121314151617181920conduct?2122232425In doing so, you may consider the person'sconduct and all of the circ*mstances surrounding thatconduct, including, but not limited to, to the following:What, if anything, did the person do or say?What result, if any, followed the person'sAnd was that result the natural, necessary andprobable consequence of that conduct.Therefore, in this case, from the facts you findto have been proven, decide whether you can infer beyond areasonable doubt that the Defendant had the intent requiredSusan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

Jury Charge4841As I previously explained, a person acts with1for the commission of this crime.2345७789101112131415intent to defraud when his or her conscious objective orpurpose is to do so.In order to prove an intent to defraud, thePeople need not prove that the Defendant acted with theintent to defraud any particular person or entity. Ageneral intent to defraud any person or entity suffices.Intent to defraud is also not constricted to anintent to deprive another of property or money and canextend beyond economic concerns.For the crime of falsifying business records inthe first degree, the intent to defraud must include anintent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal thecommission thereof.Under our law, although the People must prove anintent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal thecommission thereof, they need not prove that the othercrime was,in fact, committed, aided, or concealed.The People allege that the other crime theDefendant intended to commit, aid, or conceal is a16171819202122violation of New York Election Law Section 17-152.23Section 17-152 of the New York Election Law2425provides that any two or more than persons who conspire topromote or prevent the election of any person to a publicSusan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

1234516Jury Charge4842office by unlawful means and which conspiracy is acted uponby one or more of the parties thereto, shall be guilty ofconspiracy to promote or prevent an election.Under our law, a person is guilty of such aconspiracy when, with intent that conduct be performed thatwould promote or prevent the election of a person to publicoffice by unlawful means, he or she agrees with one or more78persons to engage in or cause the performance of such9conduct.10Knowledge of a conspiracy does not by itself make11the Defendant a co-conspirator.121314The Defendant must intendthat conduct be performed that would promote or prevent theelection of a person to public office by unlawful means.Intent mean conscious objective or purpose.1516Thus, a person acts with the intent that conductbe performed that would promote or prevent the election of171819202122232425a person to public office by unlawful means when his or herconscious objective or purpose is that such conduct beperformed.Evidence that Defendant was present when othersagreed to engage in the performance of a crime does not byitself show that he personally agreed to engage in theconspiracy.(Whereupon, Principal Court Reporter, SusanPearce-Bates was relieved by Senior Court Reporter LisaSusan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter

1Kramsky.)234510678910111213141516171819202122232425Jury ChargeSusan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSAPrincipal Court Reporter4843

1Jury Charge4844234LO5(The following proceedings are continued from thepreceding page.)THE COURT:(Continuing.)Although you must conclude unanimously that theDefendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of67any person to a public office by unlawful means,8910111213141516171819202122232425you neednot be unanimous as to what those unlawful means were.In determining whether the Defendant conspired topromote or prevent the election of any person to a publicoffice by unlawful means, you may consider the following:One, violations of the Federal Election CampaignAct, again, otherwise known as FECA;Two, the falsification of other business records;or, three, violation of tax laws.The first of the People's theories of "unlawfulmeans, which I will now define for you is the Federal"Election Campaign Act.Under the Federal Election Campaign Act, it isunlawful for an individual to willfully make a contributionto any candidate with respect to any election for Federaloffice, including the office of President of the UnitedStates, which exceeds a certain limit.In 2015 and 2016, that limit was $2,700.It is also unlawful under the Federal ElectionLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48451Campaign Act for any corporation to willfully make a2contribution of any amount to a candidate or candidate's34campaign in connection with any Federal election, or for anyperson to cause such a corporate contribution.5For purposes of these prohibitions, and expenditure678910111213made in cooperation, consultation or concert with, or at therequest or suggestion of, a candidate or his agents shall beconsidered to be a contribution to such candidate.The terms "contribution" and "expenditure" includeanything of value, including any purchase, payment, loan, oradvance, made by any person for the purpose of influencingany election to Federal office.Under Federal law, a third party's payment of a14 candidate's expenses is deemed to be a contribution to the1516171819202122232425candidate, unless, the payment would have been madeirrespective of the candidacy.If the payment would have been made even in theabsence of the candidacy, the payment should not be treatedas a contribution.FECA's definitions of "contribution" and"expenditure" do not include any cost incurred in coveringor carrying a news story, commentary, or editorial by amagazine, periodical publication, or similar press entity solong as such activity is a normal, legitimate pressfunction.Lisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge484612345678910111213141516171819202122232425This is called the Press Exemption.For example, the term "legitimate press function"includes solicitation letters seeking new subscribers to apublication."The second of the People's theories of "unlawfulmeans, which I will define for you now is the falsificationof other business records.Under New York Law, a person is guilty ofFalsifying Business Records in the Second Degree when withintent to defraud, he or she makes or causes a false entriesin the business records of an enterprise.I previously defined for you the terms enterprise,business records and intent to defraud.For purposes of determine whether FalsifyingBusiness Records in the Second Degree was an unlawful meansused by a conspiracy to promote or prevent an election here,you may consider:One, the bank records associated with MichaelCohen's account formation paperwork for ResolutionConsultants--for Resolution Consultants LLC and EssentialConsultants LLC accounts;Two, the bank records associated with MichaelCohen's wire to Keith Davidson;Three, the invoice from Investor Advisory Services,Inc., to Resolution Consultants LLC;Lisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

12345От67Jury Charge4847And, four, the 1099-Miscellaneous forms that TheTrump Organization issued to Michael Cohen."The People's third theory of "unlawful means,which I will define for you now, is a violation of Tax Laws.Under New York State and New York City Law, it isunlawful to knowingly supply or submit materially false orfraudulent information in connection with any tax return.89101112Likewise, under Federal law, it is unlawful for aperson to willfully make any tax return, statement, or otherdocument that is fraudulent or false as to any materialmatter, or that the person does not believe to be true orcorrect as to every material matter.1314151617181920Under these Federal, State and Local Laws, suchconduct is unlawful, even if it does not result inunderpayment of taxes.In order for you to find the Defendant guilty ofthe crime of Falsifying Business Records in the FirstDegree, under count one of the indictment, the People arerequired to prove, from all of the evidence in the case,beyond a reasonable doubt, each of the following two21elements:22First, that on or about February 14th, 2017, in the23 County of New York and elsewhere, the Defendant, personally,24or by acting in concert with another person or persons,made25or caused the false entry in the business records of anLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48481enterprise, specifically, an invoice from Michael Cohen2dated February 14th, 2017, marked as a record of the Donald34J. Trump Revocable Trust, and kept and maintained by TheTrump Organization;567And, two, that the Defendant did so with intent todefraud that included an intent to commit another crime orto aid or conceal the commission thereof.8If you find the People have proven beyond a9101112reasonable doubt each of those two elements, you must findthe Defendant guilty of this crime.If you find that the People have not proven beyonda reasonable doubt either one or both of those elements, you13must find the Defendant not guilty of this crime.1415161718192021222324You have now heard me define the law for count one.Each forThere are 33 remaining counts in the indictment.Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree and eachoccurring in New York County.The only difference is that each count pertains toa different business record and possibly a different date.The underlying law applies in the same way to eachof the remaining counts so I will only repeat it in full onemore time before I read count 34.Of course, you can ask me to repeat the law in itsentirety as many times as you wish and I will be happy to do25SO.Lisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge484912The second count pertains to an entry in the DetailGeneral Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust,3dated February 14th, 2017, bearing voucher number 842457,456and kept or maintained by The Trump Organization.The third count pertains to an entry in the DetailGeneral Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust,7dated February 14th, 2017, bearing voucher number 842460,8and kept or maintained by The Trump Organization.910The fourth count pertains to a Donald J. TrumpRevocable Trust account check and check stub dated1112131415161718192021222324February 14, 2017, bearing check number 000138, and kept ormaintained by The Trump Organization.The fifth count pertains to an invoice from MichaelCohen dated March 16, 2017, marked as a record of the DonaldJ. Trump Revocable Trust and kept or maintained by The TrumpOrganization.The sixth count pertains to an entry in the DetailGeneral Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust,dated March 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 17th, 2017, bearing check number 000147, and kept ormaintained by The Trump Organization.25The eighth count pertains to an invoice fromLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48501Michael Cohen, dated April 13th, 2017, marked as a record of2Donald J. Trump, and kept or maintained by The Trump345Organization.The ninth count pertains to an entry in the DetailGeneral Ledger for Donald J. Trump, dated June 19th, 2017,67bearing voucher number 858770, and kept or maintained by TheTrump Organization.8The tenth count pertains to a Donald J. Trump9101112account check and check stub dated June 19th, 2017, bearingcheck number 002740, and kept or maintained by The TrumpOrganization.The eleventh count pertains to an invoice from13 Michael Cohen dated May 22nd, 2017, marked as a record ofDonald J. Trump, and kept or maintained by The TrumpOrganization.141516171819202122232425The 12th count pertains to an entry in the DetailGeneral Ledger for Donald J. Trump, dated May 22nd, 2017,bearing voucher number 855331, and kept or maintained by TheTrump Organization.The 13th count pertains to a Donald J. Trumpaccount check and check stub dated May 23rd, 2017, bearingcheck number 002700, and kept or maintained by The TrumpOrganization.The 14th count pertains to an invoice from MichaelCohen, dated June 16th, 2017, marked as a record of DonaldLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48511J. Trump, and kept or maintained by The Trump Organization.2The 15th count pertains to an entry in the Detail3General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, dated June 19th, 2017,45bearing voucher number 858772, and kept or maintained by TheTrump Organization.6The 16th count pertains to a Donald J. Trump7account check and check stub dated June 19th, 2017, bearing8910111213141516171819202122232425check number 002741, and kept or maintained by The TrumpOrganization.The 17th count pertains to an invoice from MichaelCohen dated July 11th, 2017, marked as a record of Donald J.Trump, and kept or maintained by The Trump Organization.The 18th count pertains to an entry in the DetailGeneral Ledger for Donald J. Trump, dated July 11, 2017,bearing voucher number 861096, and kept or maintained by TheTrump Organization.The 19th count pertains to a Donald J. Trumpaccount check and check stub dated July 11th, 2017, bearingnumber check number 002781, and kept or maintained by TheTrump Organization.The 20th count pertains to an invoice from MichaelCohen dated August 1st, 2017, marked as a record of DonaldJ. Trump, and kept or maintained by The Trump Organization.The 21st count pertains to an entry in the DetailGeneral Ledger for Donald J. Trump, dated August 1, 2017,Lisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge485212bearing voucher number 863641, and kept or maintained by TheTrump Organization.3The 22nd count pertains to a Donald J. Trump4account check and check stub dated August 1, 2017, bearing567891011check number 002821, and kept or maintained by The TrumpOrganization.The 23rd count pertains to an invoice from MichaelCohen dated September 11th, 2017, marked as a record ofDonald J. Trump, and kept or maintained by The TrumpOrganization.The 24th count pertains to an entry in the Detail12 General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, dated September 11th,2017, bearing voucher number 868174, and kept or maintainedby The Trump Organization.13141516The 25th count pertains to a Donald J. Trumpaccount check and check stub, dated September 12th, 2017,17 bearing check number 002908, and kept or maintained by The1819202122Trump Organization.The 26th count pertains to an invoice from MichaelCohen dated October 18th, 2017, marked as a record of DonaldJ. Trump and kept or maintained by The Trump Organization.The 27th count pertains to an entry in the Detail23 General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, dated October 18th,24252017, bearing voucher number 872654, and kept or maintainedby The Trump Organization.Lisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48531The 28th count pertains to a Donald J. Trump2account check and check stub dated October 18th, 2017,3456789101112bearing check number 002944, and kept or maintained by TheTrump Organization.The 29th count pertains to an invoice from MichaelCohen dated November 20th, 2017, marked as a record ofDonald J. Trump, and kept or maintained by The TrumpOrganization.The 30th count pertains to an entry in the DetailGeneral Ledger for Donald J. Trump, dated November 20, 2017,bearing voucher number 876511, and kept or maintained by TheTrump Organization.13141516The 31st count pertains to a Donald J. Trumpaccount or check stub dated November 21st, 2017, bearingcheck number 002980, and kept or maintained by The Trump1718192021Organization.The 32nd count pertains to an invoice from MichaelCohen, dated December 1st, 2017, marked as a record ofDonald J. Trump, and kept or maintained by The TrumpOrganization.The 33rd count pertains to an entry in the Detail22 General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, dated December 1st,2324252017, bearing voucher number 877785, and kept or maintainedby The Trump Organization.The 34th count is also Falsifying Business RecordsLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48541in the First Degree, but as it pertains to a check and2check stub dated September 5th, 2017, bearing check number3003006.45678I will now repeat for you the law pertaining to thecrime of Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree inits entirety.Under our law, a person is guilty of FalsifyingBusiness Records in the First Degree when, with intent to109defraud that includes an intent to commit another crime orto aid or conceal the commission thereof, that person makes1112or causes a false entry in the business records of anenterprise.131415161718The following terms used in that definition have aspecial meaning:""Enterprise.' "Enterprise" means any entity of oneor more persons, corporate or otherwise, public or private,engaged in business, commercial, professional, industrial,social, political or governmental activity.19"Business record" means any writing or article,2021including computer data or a computer program, kept ormaintained by an enterprise for the purpose of evidencing or22 reflecting its condition or activity.23"Intent" means conscious objective or purpose.2425Thus, a person acts with intent to defraud when his or herconscious objective or purpose is to do so.Lisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48551Intent does not require premeditation.2words, intent does not require advance planning.34567In otherNor is itnecessary that the intent be in a person's mind for anyparticular period of time.The intent can be formed, and need only exist, atthe very moment the person engages in prohibited conduct oracts to cause the prohibited result, and not at any earlier8time.910111213141516171819202122232425The question naturally arises as to how todetermine whether a defendant had the intent required forthe commission of a crime.To make that determination in this case, you mustdecide whether if the required intent can be inferred beyonda reasonable doubt from the proven facts.In doing so, you may consider the person's conductand all of the circ*mstances surrounding that conduct,including, but not limited to, the following:What, if anything, did the person do or say; whatresult, if any, followed the person's conduct; and was thatresult the natural and necessary and probable consequence ofthat conduct?Therefore, in this case, from the facts you find tohave been proven, decide whether you can infer beyond areasonable doubt that the Defendant had the intent requiredfor the commission of this crime.Lisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge4856123Sti456As I previously explained, a person acts withintent to defraud when his or her conscious objective orpurpose is to do so.In order to prove an intent to defraud, the Peopleneed not prove that the Defendant acted with the intent todefraud any particular person or entity.7A general intent to defraud any person or entity8suffices.910111213Intent to defraud is also not constricted to anintent to deprive another of property or money and canextend beyond economic concerns.For the count of Falsifying Business Records in theFirst Degree, the intent to defraud must include an intent14to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission15161718thereof.Under our law, although the People must prove anintent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal thecommission thereof, they need not prove that the other crime19was,in fact, committed, aided or concealed.202122The People allege that the other crime that theDefendant intended to commit, aid, or conceal is a violationof New York Election Law Section 17-152.23Section 17-152 of the New York Election Law24provides that any two or more persons who conspire to25promote or prevent the election of any person to a publicLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48571office by unlawful means, and which conspiracy is acted upon2by one or more of the parties thereto, shall be guilty of345678conspiracy to promote or prevent an election.Under our law, a person is guilty of such aconspiracy when, with intent that conduct be performed thatwould promote or prevent the election of a person to publicoffice by unlawful means, he or she agrees with one or morepersons to engage in or cause the performance of such9conduct.10111213141516171819202122232425Knowledge of a conspiracy does not by itself makethe Defendant a coconspirator.The Defendant must intend that conduct be performedthat would promote or prevent the election of a person topublic office by unlawful means.Intent means conscious objective or purpose.Thus, a person acts with the intent that conduct beperformed that would promote or prevent the election of aperson to public office by unlawful means when his or herconscious objective or purpose is that such conduct beperformed.Evidence that the Defendant was present when othersagreed to engage in the performance of a crime does not byitself show that he personally agreed to engage in aconspiracy.Although you must conclude unanimously that theLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

12345678910111213141516171819202122232425Jury ChargeDefendant conspired to promote or prevent the election ofany person to a public office by unlawful means, you neednot be unanimous as to what those unlawful means were.4858In determining whether the Defendant conspired topromote or prevent the election of any person to a publicoffice by unlawful means, you may consider the followingunlawful means:Violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act,otherwise known as FECA; the falsification of other businessrecords; or violations of Tax Laws.The first of the People's theories of "unlawfulmeans, which I will now define for you is the FederalElection Campaign Act.Under the Federal Election Campaign Act, it isunlawful for an individual to willfully make a contributionto any candidate with respect to any election for Federaloffice, including the office of President of the UnitedStates, which exceeds a certain limit.In 2015 and 2016, that limit was $2,700.It is also unlawful under the Federal ElectionCampaign Act for any corporation to willfully make acontribution 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 of these prohibitions, and expenditureLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48591made in cooperation, consultation or concert with, or at the2request or suggestion of, a candidate or his agents, shall345678be considered to be a contribution to such candidate.The terms "contribution" and "expenditure" includeanything of value, including any purchase, payment, loan, oradvance made by any person for the purpose of influencingany election for Federal office.Under Federal Law, a third party's payment of a9 candidate's expenses is deemed to be a contribution to the1011candidate unless the payment would have been madeirrespective of the candidacy.1213141516If the payment would have been made even in theabsence of the candidacy, the payment should not be treatedas a contribution.FECA's definitions of "contribution" and"expenditure" do not include any costs incurred in coveringor carrying a news story, commentary, or editorial by amagazine, periodical publication, or similar press entity,so long as such activity is a normal, legitimate pressfunction.171819202122the term "legitimate press function,232425This is called the Press Exemption. For example,includes solicitationletters seeking new subscribers to a publication.The People's second theory of "unlawful means,"which I will define for you is the falsification of otherLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48601 business records.234567891011121314151617181920Under New York Law, a person is guilty ofFalsifying Business Records in the Second Degree when withintent to the defraud, he or she makes or causes a falseentry in a business records of an enterprise.I previously defined for you the terms enterprise,business records and intent to defraud.For purposes of determining whether FalsifyingBusiness Records in the Second Degree was an "unlawfulmeans, used by conspiracy to promote or prevent anelection, you may consider:The bank records associated with Michael Cohen'saccount formation paperwork for the Resolution ConsultantsLLC and Essential Consultants LLC accounts;The bank records associated with Michael Cohen'swire to Keith Davidson;The invoice from Investor Advisory Services, Inc.,to Resolution Consultants;And the 1099-Miscellaneous forms that The TrumpOrganization issued to Michael Cohen.212223The People's third theory of "unlawful means,which I will define for you, is a violation of Tax Laws.Under New York State and New York City Law, it isW24 unlawful to knowingly supply or submit materially false or25fraudulent information in connection with any tax return.Lisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge486112Likewise, under Federal Law, it is unlawful for aperson to willfully make any tax return, statement, or other3document that is fraudulent or false as to any material45matter, or that the person does not believe to be true andcorrect as to every material matter.6Under these Federal, State and Local Laws, such78910111213conduct is unlawful even if it does not result inunderpayment of taxes.In order for you to find the Defendant guilty ofthe crime of Falsifying Business Records in the First Degreeunder count 34, the People are required to prove, from allof the evidence in the case, beyond a reasonable doubt, eachof the following two elements:14First, that on or about December 5, 2017, in the1516171819202122232425County of New York, and elsewhere, the Defendant,personally, or by acting in concert with another person orpersons, made or caused a false entry in the businessrecords of an enterprise, specifically, a Donald J. Trumpaccount check and check stub dated December 5th, 2017,bearing check number 003006, and kept or maintained by TheTrump Organization;And that the Defendant did so with intent todefraud that included an intent to commit another crime orto aid or conceal the commission thereof.If you find the People have proven beyond aLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge4862123456reasonable doubt both of those elements, you must find theDefendant guilty of this crime.If you find the People have not proven beyond areasonable doubt either one or both of these elements, youmust find the Defendant not guilty of this crime.Let me now explain motive, and in particular, the7difference between motive and intent.8Intent means conscious objective or purpose.Thus,9a person commits a crime--a criminal act with intent, when10111213141516that person's conscious objective or purpose is to engage inthe act which the law forbids or to bring about an unlawfulresult.Motive, on the other hand, is the reason why aperson chooses to engage in criminal conduct.If intent is an element of a charged crime, thatelement must be proved by the People beyond a reasonable17doubt.18In this case,192021intent is, as I have explained, anelement of the crime of Falsifying Business Records in theFirst Degree.Motive, however, is not an element of the crimes22charged.23Therefore, the People are not required to prove a2425motive for the commission of the charged crimes.Nevertheless, evidence of a motive, or evidence ofLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48631the lack of a motive, may be considered by the jury.234567For example, if you find from the evidence that theDefendant had a motive to commit the crime charged, that isa circ*mstance you may wish to consider as tending tosupport a finding of guilt.On the other hand, if the proof establishes thatthe Defendant had no motive to commit the crime charged,8that is a circ*mstance you may wish to consider as tending910111213141516171819202122232425to establish that the Defendant is not guilty of a chargedcrime.Your verdict, on each count you consider, whetherguilty or not guilty, must be unanimous, that is, each andevery juror must agree to it.To reach a unanimous verdict, you must deliberatewith the other jurors.That means, you should discuss the evidence andconsult with each other, listen to each other, give eachother's views careful consideration, and reason togetherwhen considering the evidence.And when you deliberate, you should do so with aview towards reaching an agreement, if that can be donewithout surrendering individual judgment.Each of you must decide the case for yourself, butonly after a fair and impartial consideration of theevidence with the other jurors.Lisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge486412345678910111213141516171819202122232425You should not surrender an honest view of theevidence simply because you want the trial to end, orbecause you are out voted.At the same time, you should not hesitate tore-examine your views and change your mind, if you becomeconvinced that your position was not correct.Some jurors took notes. Any notes taken are onlyan aid to your memory and must not take precedence over yourindependent recollection.Those jurors who chose not to take notes must relyon their own independent recollection and must not beinfluenced by any notes that another juror may have taken.Any notes you took are only for your own personaluse in refreshing your recollection.A juror's notes are not a substitute for therecorded transcript of the testimony or for any exhibitreceived in evidence.If there is a discrepancy between a juror'srecollection and his or her notes regarding the evidence,you should ask to have the relevant testimony read back orthe exhibit produced in the jury room.In addition, a juror's notes are not a substitutefor the detailed explanation I have given you of theprinciples of law that govern this case.If there is a discrepancy between a juror'sLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge4865231 recollection and his or her notes regarding thoseprinciples, you should ask me to explain those principlesagain, and I'll do so.45You may see any or all of the exhibits that werereceived in evidence.678910111213141516171819202122232425Simply write me a note telling me which exhibit orexhibits you want to see.You may also have the testimony of any witness readback to you in whole or in part.Again, if you want a read back, write me a notetelling me what testimony you wish to hear.If you are interested in hearing only a portion ofa witness' testimony, please specify in your note whichwitness and, with as much detail as possible, which part ofthe testimony it is that you want to hear.Of course,when testimony is read back, questionsto which an objection was sustained and material otherwisestruck from the 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.Under our law, the first juror selected is known asthe foreperson.During deliberations, the foreperson's opinion andvote are not entitled to any more importance than that ofany other juror.Lisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

12Jury ChargeWhat we ask the foreperson to do duringdeliberations is we ask you to sign any written note thatthe jury sends to the Court.486634567891011The foreperson does not have to write the note oreven agree with its contents.The foreperson's signature indicates only that thewriting does, in fact, come from the jury.The foreperson may also chair the jury'sdiscussions during deliberations.When the jury has reached a verdict, guilty or notguilty, the entire jury will be asked to come into court.The foreperson will be asked whether the jury hasreached a verdict.And if the foreperson says, yes, the forepersonwill then be asked what the verdict is for each of theAfter that, the entire jury will be asked whetherthat is their verdict and will answer yes or no.1213141516charged counts.171819202122232425Finally, upon the request of the party, each jurorwill be asked individually, whether the announced verdict isthe verdict of that juror, and upon being asked, each jurorwill answer yes or no.I will give you a form known as a verdict sheet.The verdict sheet lists each count submitted for yourconsideration and the possible verdicts.Lisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge486712345678910Please use the form to record your verdict with an"X" or a check mark in the appropriate place.In addition to listing the counts, I have addedsome additional language on the verdict sheet in order todistinguish the counts.You will notice that I have indicated whether acount pertains 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 youdistinguish between the various counts.It is not a substitute for my full instructions onthe meaning and elements of each charge, and it should notdiscourage you from asking me to define a crime again if aquestion about it arises.Finally, there are a few remaining rules which youmust observe during your deliberations.First, while you are here in the courthouse,11121314151617181920jury room.21You may not leave the jury room during22deliberations.232425Lunch, of course, be provided.If you have a cell phone or other electronicdevice, please give it to a court officer or the sergeant todeliberating on the case, you will be kept together in theLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge486812hold for you while you are engaged in deliberations.You must deliberate about the case only when you3 are all gathered together in the jury room.Sti45678910111213141516You must not, for example, discuss the case as yougo to and from the courtroom.It is important that each juror have theopportunity to hear whatever another juror has to say aboutthe case, and that by law must only be done when you are allgathered together in the jury room.Thus, if for any reason, all 12 of you are notgathered together in the jury room, please stop deliberatinguntil you are all present.During your deliberations, you must discuss thecase only among yourselves; you must not discuss the casewith anyone else, including a court officer, and you mustnot permit anyone other than a fellow juror to discuss thecase in your presence.If you have a question or request, you mustcommunicate with me by writing a note, which you will give1718192021me.to me--which you will give to a court officer to give to22The law requires that you communicate with me in23 writing, in part, to make sure that there are no2425misunderstandings.At this time, the plan is to work today until 4:30.Lisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48691We will figure out the other days going forward.2It is unlikely, however, that even if we do work3late that we would work beyond 6:00 on any night.45I should explain that, under our law, I am notpermitted to have a conversation about the facts of the67case, or a possible verdict, or the vote of the jury on any8count, with any one juror, or group of jurors, or even allof the jurors.9Thus, in any note that you send to me, do not tell10111213141516171819202122232425me what the vote of the jury is on any count.If a juror wants to speak to me duringdeliberations, a meeting here in the courtroom with theparties will be arranged.No juror, however, can tell me what is being saidabout the facts of the case, or a possible verdict, or whatthe vote of any juror or the jury is on any count.And, while I will, of course, listen to whatever ajuror has to say that does not involve those subjects, I maynot be able to respond to that juror if the responseinvolves instructions on the law.I may be required to call into court the entirejury and respond by speaking to the entire jury.The reason for that is that our law wants to makesure that each and every juror hears, at exactly the sametime, whatever I have to say about the law, and our lawLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48701wants to make sure that the jury hears those instructions2from me and not from another juror.3That concludes my instructions on the law.45וס16Counsel, please approach, with the court reporter.(At Side Bar.)101112131415789thing.THE COURT: Are there any objections or exceptions?MR. STEINGLASS: Just one thing. Just one minorTHE COURT: Are there any exceptions to the charge?MR. STEINGLASS: No.MR. BOVE: No, Judge.Other than to preserve the ones that we made, tothe extent that it differs from our requests and what weraised in the charge conference.1617MR. STEINGLASS: One thing is that, Judge, I'msorry I didn't notice this earlier, that we asked that when1819202122STEINGLASS: No, I know.2324the foreperson signs the notes, can we make it clear that hedoes that with his juror number and not his actual name?THE COURT: I think I made clear that Juror Numberis the foreperson.MR.THE COURT: You mean to sign it with his jurornumber instead of his name?25MR. STEINGLASS:To sign it with his juror number,Lisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge1instead of his name, yes.2THE COURT: Of course.3Thank you.Sti44871MR. STEINGLASS:THE COURT: All right. What do you want to do withthe alternates?5OT6MR. BLANCHE:Dismiss them.7THE COURT:I'm sorry?8MR. BOVE:Dismiss them.910111213MR. STEINGLASS: If we're going to dismiss thealternates, Judge, I would ask for you to considerinstructing them not to speak publicly about the case untilthe verdict has been rendered.I just think the danger of contamination is too14great.15And, so,1617181920212223I would ask you to do that and also tomaybe to remind them, the alternates, that their names arenot publicly known, and that they should not disclose thenames if they know them of any of the sitting jurors.for now,THE COURT: I'll do that, but what I'm going to doI'm going to keep the alternate jurors for now.I heard you that you asked for them to be excused,but I going to go ahead and keep them for a little while tosee what happens.24MR. STEINGLASS:25Okay.THE COURT: So I'm going to ask the six alternateLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48721jurors to step aside, and I am going to excuse the 12 jurors2and I will give the instruction that you just raised.3MR. STEINGLASS: Thank you very much.45וס1678910111213THE COURT: All right. Thank you very much.(Side bar concluded.)THE COURT: One clarification.I indicated that juror notes should be signed bythe foreperson. I meant for you to indicate Juror Numberone, all right, and not your name, but just that it's comingfrom the foreperson.Do not sign with your actual name, all right.You are going to begin the only active part of yourjury service, you will begin the process of deliberations.Again, you will be given some blank notes. Ifthere is anything that you need, if you have any questions,just let me know.When you send me a note, please be sure to includeyour name as the foreperson, also include the date and thetime. It's very important for us.141516171819202122 approach.Actually, I have one more question. Please232224(At Side Bar.)25THE COURT:How do you want to the handle theLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48731evidence?2MS. HOFFINGER:3456789access.1011first.1213141516We have a laptop prepared with theProsecution's exhibits as well as the Defense exhibits andthe two Court exhibits.It doesn't have a password on it.--We can certainly show have one of our paralegalsshow the jury how to access it.But it doesn't have a password. It's very easy toMR.STEINGLASS: If you guys want to examine itMR. BOVE: We trust that you put it togetheraccurately and completely.I think, though, that we would ask that somebodythat's not a member of the Government show the jurors how touse the laptop, assuming there's nothing complicated, no17fancy features.18MR. STEINGLASS:Who would you like?19202122232425MR. BOVE: A member of the Court staff.MR. STEINGLASS:MS. HOFFINGER:Oh, I see.OtherwiseTHE COURT: I'm not able to involve them. It's notour evidence.It's not our laptop.MS. HOFFINGER: What we could do, and it has beendone before, if would you like, one member of the DefenseLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48741team can stand there, with one member of the Prosecution2team.34OT5167THE COURT: That's what I have done in the past.MS. HOFFINGER: It's literally just opening thelaptop, it's a sub folder and each is designated.THE COURT: All right.We will do it that way then, okay.MS. HOFFINGER: Okay. Thank you.(Side bar concluded.)8910*1112131415THE COURT: Jurors, I was just clarifying how wewere going to handle the evidence.And I was told that there is a laptop that containsall of the evidence, that everything that was introducedinto evidence during the course the trial is contained on16that laptop.17I need one or two volunteers to be shown how to18operate that laptop.1920212223If you can just raise your hand.Okay, juror number four and juror number six.All right. You will be shown in a minute how tooperate that.I'm going to ask you to step out now to begin your24 deliberations.25In the meantime, the six alternates, if you couldLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Chargejust step to the side and allow the other jurors to step487512out.345וס16Thank you.THE COURT OFFICER:All rise.(Jury exits to commence their deliberations at11:30 a.m.)7***89THE COURT: Please be seated.(The six alternates remain in the courtroom at this10time.)11THE COURT: So, you have been with us for a long12time.13And you have been incredibly diligent and14151617incredibly hard working.I always watch the jurors, and I watch to seewho is paying attention and who is not, and I can honestlysay that every one of you have been very engaged in this18case.1920I noticed that alternate number three, I think youwent through several notebooks during the course of this21trial.22232425service.But we are not going to excuse you just yet.We are not going to let you be done with your juryI'm going to ask you to please remain with us,Lisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48761234because there might be a need for you at some point duringdeliberations.Even though you are not one of the 12 deliberatingjurors, though, all of the admonitions that I have given toyou at this point continue to apply to you, including thatyou may not discuss this case among yourselves or with567anyone else, and that you continue to keep an open mind as89to the Defendant's guilt or innocence and that you do notform or express an opinion as to the Defendant's guilt orinnocence.We are also going to ask you to please hand in yourcell phones and any other electronic devices.And we will try to figure out another way to keepyou guys entertained.But, at this point, please follow the instructionsof the Sergeant, and the Sergeant will show you where youwill be sitting for the time being.1011121314151617181920time.)2122232425laptop.THE COURT OFFICER: All rise.(Six alternate jurors exit the courtroom at this*THE COURT: Please be seated.Just to clarify, juror number four and juror numbersix indicated and volunteered to be shown how to work theLisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48771234LO567Should we bring them out here or, yes, let's bringjuror number four and juror number six out to be shown howto work the laptop.And just to be clear, for the record, all of theevidence is there and the jurors can have access to thatlaptop, and all of the evidence and they can just lookthrough those files; right?8MS. HOFFINGER:Yes.91011121314THE COURT:No.THE COURT: All right.(Pause in the proceedings.)THE COURT: All right. We are bringing in jurornumber four and juror number six.THE SERGEANT: Do you want them seated, Judge?They can come right over to the15table.1617181920(Pause in the proceedings.)THE COURT: So, while we wait for jurors numberfour and number six, I just want to go on the record andoh, they are coming into the courtroom now.They can just come in.21That's fine.22232425THE LIEUTENANT:Jurors entering.(Two jurors enter the courtroom at this time.)(Explanation of the laptop operation was done offthe record, in the presence of all counsel, at this time.)Lisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge1THE COURT: All right.2You can take it.3Sti4OT516789104878(Laptop handed to the juror.)(Two jurors exit the courtroom at this time.)THE COURT: I am just being extra cautious.Mr. Blanche, I just wanted to make sure that youwith your client and that heconsulted with your attorneyhas consented to the jury receiving the entire laptop withall of the exhibits contained in that laptop?MR. BLANCHE: Yes, your Honor.THE COURT:Okay. And you also consulted with thePeople and you are satisfied that the laptop is otherwiseclean of any other information other than everything elsethat was introduced into evidence in this case.MR.BLANCHE: Yes, your Honor.I observed the laptop and the People representedthat there is nothing else on it; that appeared to be the111213141516We looked at three folders: Court exhibits,Defense Exhibits and the People's exhibits, that wereincluded the list that we had previously reviewed and that1718case.19202122232425we provided. And we consent.THE COURT: And let the record reflect that jurorsnumber four and number six did come into the courtroom, andthey were instructed on how to operate the laptop by, ILisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

Jury Charge48791believe it was somebody from the DA's office, but,234OT5Mr. Blanche, you were standing there while this washappening; is that right?MR. BLANCHE: Yes, your Honor.Correct.THE COURT: All right. I'm going to be in therobing room for a little while, just in case we get a quicknote, and then I will probably just go upstairs.I do direct all of you that you please be here; youcannot leave the building.And we need you all to be ready to get here quicklyif we receive a note.MR. STEINGLASS:Thank you.MR. BLANCHE: Thank you.THE COURT: All right.(Recess taken while the jury deliberates at67891011121314151611:40 a.m.)17181920212223***2425Lisa Kramsky,Senior Court Reporter

12345Deliberations4880(Whereupon, the case is in recess while the jurydeliberates.)*****THE SERGEANT: Remain seated.Come to order. Part 59 is in session.THE COURT: Good afternoon.1067We received a note.891011121314151617Number 4.MR. STEINGLASS:Did you ask a question?THE COURT: We received a note.Have you both received a copy of that note?MR. BLANCHE: Yes, Judge.MR. STEINGLASS: Yes.THE COURT: It's been marked as Court ExhibitIt was signed by the foreperson or marked by theforeperson at 2:56.I'm sorry.18I'll read it into the record.19202122232425The note contains four requests:"One. We, the jury, request David Pecker'stestimony regarding phone conversation with Donald Trumpwhile Pecker was in the investor meeting."Two. David Pecker's testimony regarding thedecision not to finalize and fund the assignment ofMcDougal's life rights.Laurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Deliberations48811"Three. Pecker's testimony regarding Trump Tower2meeting.3"And, four. Michael Cohen's testimony regarding4 the Trump Tower meeting."LO5678910111213141516171819202122232425Did I read that correctly?MR. STEINGLASS: Yes.MR. BLANCHE: Yes, your Honor.THE COURT: I'm told that we have two sets ofpagination for the transcript. One set is the set that wereceived on a daily basis. The combined set is slightlydifferent in terms of pagination. I think we should allwork off the combined set.I am told that the court reporter has a PageIndex that's about 700 pages. That can make it easier foryou to find it.I will be in the robing room when you're ready.Let me know when you're ready for read-back.One more question. When we bring the jurors in,ordinarily, I like to sit the alternate jurors in thefront row. Obviously, that's not possible here.Is there any objection to having the alternatejurors sitting in the box with the 12 jurors, as they'vebeen sitting all along?MR. STEINGLASS: No objection.MR. BLANCHE: We don't have an objection to that.Laurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

1234Deliberations4882THE COURT:Thank you.The court reporter will hand you her Index so youcould work off that.(Whereupon, a recess is taken while the partiesLO5look up the requested read-back.)6**7THE SERGEANT:Remain seated.8910Come to order. Part 59 is back in session.THE COURT: I know you've both been working onthe jury note and you're getting closer.11But, we did just receive another note.12I believe you both received copies of that second13note.14MR. STEINGLASS:15MR. BLANCHE:Yes.Yes.16171819It says:202122232425THE COURT: This is marked as Court ExhibitNumber 5. It has been marked by the jury foreperson. Itwas marked at 3:51."We, the jury, request to re-hear thejudge's instructions."In light of that note, my suggestion is that webring the jury out here, back into the courtroom; we tellthem that we're working on finding the read-back that theyrequested; and I clarify when they say they want theinstructions, whether they want the entire instructions orLaurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Deliberations4883891011121314151617Anything else that we123+145just a portion of the instructions.Is there any objection to that?MR. STEINGLASS: No objection.MR. BLANCHE: No objection.THE COURT: For the record, did I read that6 correctly?7Is that the same note that you have?MR. BLANCHE: Yes.MR. STEINGLASS: Yes, Judge.THE COURT: There was no objection, for purposesof what we're doing now, to having the six alternates sitin the box with the twelve jurors, as they've been doingall along.If and when the time comes where there's averdict, if we still have the alternates with us, I amgoing to have the alternates sit in the front row.I did have a question--18regarding the laptop.1920Does that laptop have Wi-Fi capabilities?(People in the audience behind the People nod21yes.)22232425THE COURT: Is there?MS. HOFFINGER: Yes.THE COURT: Is there in a way to disable thatWi-Fi capability?Laurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Deliberations123454884MS. HOFFINGER: Hopefully, we should be able toturn it off.THE COURT: Tonight, after we excuse the jurors,let's get our hands on the WiFi and turn it off.I think they're gathering the jurors right now.We can bring them in when they're ready.How many pages are we looking at, total, as faras that read-back?MR. STEINGLASS:We're still going through.It looks like maybe 30?MR. BLANCHE: That's about right.THE COURT: Thirty pages.Is it fair to say that's like a 30-minute67891011121314read-back?1516171819202122232425THE COURT REPORTER:Yes.COURT OFFICER: All rise.Jury entering.(Whereupon, the jurors are present and properlyseated in the jury box at 3:59 PM, and the alternatejurors are seated in the jury box at 3:59 PM.)THE CLERK: Do the parties stipulate that alljurors are present and properly seated?MR. STEINGLASS: Yes.MR. BLANCHE: Yes.THE COURT: Thank you.Laurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Deliberations488512345678910111213THE COURT:Good afternoon, jurors.Jurors, we received two notes from you.I would like to read them now into the record andjust make sure that I understand.The first note has been marked as Court ExhibitNumber 4. It was signed by the jury foreperson at 3:56,and it requests the following:"One. David Pecker's testimony regarding thephone conversation with Donald Trump while Pecker was inthe investor meeting."Two. Pecker's testimony regarding the decisionnot to finalize and fund the assignment of McDougal's liferights.14"Three. Pecker's testimony regarding Trump Tower15meeting.16"Four. Michael Cohen's testimony regarding the17Trump Tower meeting."18Mr. Foreperson, did I read that correctly?Is19that what it says?20JUROR #1: Yes, it is.21THE COURT:Then, a few minutes ago, we received222324a second note from you. It's been marked as Court ExhibitNumber 5, also marked by the jury foreperson, this time at3:51.25This says:"At this time we, the jury, requestLaurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

1234LO5678910111213141516171819202122232425Deliberationsto re-hear the judge's instructions."Did I read that right?4886JUROR #1: Yes.THE COURT: In light of the second note wereceived, we thought it was better to bring you out now.We're still trying to find the testimony yourequested. We're close to finding it.Once we find it, the read-back itself will takeat least a half hour.Then, when we received the second note, thequestion became: Do you want to re-hear the entire set ofinstructions or particular portions of the instructions?You don't have to answer me right now.If you want, you can go back in the jury room,you can clarify, and send me another note.You also don't need to come back out here.We can deal with it on our end and have you backtomorrow morning.Before I excuse you for the day, I'm going toremind you of the rules that I've been reminding you aboutfor several weeks now, but the law requires I restatethose rules at this state of the proceedings with specialemphasis.The reason for the emphasis is you're at acrucial stage of the proceedings, in the midst of yourLaurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Deliberations48871jury deliberations.2345678910I ask you not to talk either among yourselves orwith anyone else about anything related to the case.Do not at any time request, accept, agree toaccept, or discuss with any person the receipt oracceptance of any payment or benefit in return forsupplying any information concerning the trial.You must promptly report directly to me anyincident within your knowledge involving an attempt by anyperson to improperly influence you or any member of the11jury.1213141516Do not visit or view the locations where thisincident allegedly took place.And do not use the internet, internet Maps,Google Earth, or any other program or device to search forand view any location discussed in the testimony.17181920212223Do not read view or listen to any accounts ordiscussions of the case reported by newspapers,television, radio, the internet, or any other news media.Do not attempt to research any fact, issue or lawrelated to the case, whether by discussion with others, byresearch in the library, or on the internet, or by anyother means or source.2425I want to emphasize that in addition with nottalking face-to-face with anyone in the case, you must notLaurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Deliberations4888talk to anyone about the case by other any other means,including text messages, chat rooms, blogs and socialwebsites.You must not provide any information to the case12345678chat rooms,910111213141516171819202122232425to anyone by any means whatsoever. That includes postinginformation about the case or what you were doing on thecase on any device or internet sites, including blogs,social websites, or any other means.You also must not Google or search for anyinformation about the case or the law which applies to thecase or the people involved in the case, including thedefendant, the witnesses, the lawyers or myself.trial.These rules are designed to help guarantee a fairAnd, our law, accordingly, does set forth seriousconsequences if the rules are not followed.I trust and understand that you understand andappreciate the import of following these rules, and, inaccord with your oath, you will do so.Addressing the six alternate jurors, even thoughyou are not deliberating with the other twelve jurors,these admonitions continue to apply to you, as well.Everything that I've said up to this point and everythingI just said now continues to apply for you.We'll get started tomorrow at 9:30.Laurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

1234LO56Deliberations4889Once you get to the jury room sometimes all 12of you are present--you can continue your deliberations.We'll be working out here. I promise you, we'llbe working on trying to find the read-back.When we're ready for you, we'll invite you backout.789You can decide tomorrow morning if you would liketo work late, if necessary. We will not work beyond sixo'clock. It's entirely up to you.You don't have to work late.Just let me know at some point tomorrow.I believe that's it for now.See you tomorrow morning at 9:30.Thank you.Good night.(Whereupon, the jurors and the alternate jurorsare excused for the day at 4:06 PM.)10111213141516171819202122232425THE COURT:Regarding the first note, I askCounsel to please not leave the courtroom until we'veidentified and we've settled on what that read-back is,we're all on the same page. Let me know.And at that point, we can call it in.MR. STEINGLASS: Okay.MR. BLANCHE: Can we approach?THE COURT: Sure.Laurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Proceedings489012MR. BLANCHE:Your Honor, as we work through thetranscripts, can we excuse our client for this process so3 he can go back?SH4We'll, obviously, waive his right to be presentfor this part.He's just sitting there, not doing anything.MR. STEINGLASS: Hmm. Give me one second.Thinking.(Whereupon, Mr. Steinglass pauses to think.)MR. STEINGLASS: We're not doing anything on therecord. We're just agreeing or not agreeing.The only problem is, if we don't agree and wehave to get the judge involved.567891011121314151617courthouse.1819room.202122232425MR. BLANCHE: That's true.MR. STEINGLASS:Then he'll need to be here.MR. BLANCHE: I'm not saying can he leave theI'm saying can he go back and not be inside thisTHE COURT: You mean across the hall?MR. BLANCHE:Yes.THE COURT: You can do that on the record.MS. HOFFINGER: As it turns out, the laptop doesnot have Wi-Fi capabilities, so we're good.MR. STEINGLASS: Is that on the record?Laurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Proceedings48911THE COURT REPORTER:23Yes.THE COURT: We're good.(Whereupon, the following proceedings were held4 in open court:)LO5THE COURT: Mr. Blanche, what is your6 application?1011789MR. BLANCHE:Just that President Trump couldleave and go back to the area that he's waiting while theparties continue to go through the transcript and reach anagreement on note number one.THE COURT: When you say "go back", you mean12across the hall?1314151617181920212223MR. BLANCHE: Yes, your Honor.THE COURT: No objection; right?MR. STEINGLASS: No objection.THE COURT: That's fine.As long as he's close by so in case there's anissue that needs to be resolved, he can come back quickly.I ask when you do come to an agreement as to whatthe pages are, that you write them down and give them toLaurie so she can write them down and start working onthem.MR. STEINGLASS: Will do.24THE COURT:Also, for the record, I'm informed25the laptop does not have Wi-Fi capability.Laurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Proceedings1I'll be in the robing room.2Let me know when you're ready.4892345(Whereupon, the case is in recess while theparties search for the requested read-back.)(Whereupon, Mr. Trump is excused from the6courtroom.)7(Whereupon, the case is in recess.)89(Whereupon, Counsel confer while the case is in10recess.)11**1213141516171819202122(Whereupon, Mr. Trump enters the courtroom andtakes his seat at the defense counsel table.)progress.(Whereupon, counsel confer.)THE SERGEANT: Remain seated.Come to order.THE COURT: Where do we stand?MR. STEINGLASS: I think we've made a lot ofI think there's a couple of outstanding issuesthat we may need to ask you to get involved about.THE COURT: All right.let's start with the first23Let's go over24request.25MR. STEINGLASS: Okay.Laurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Proceedings4893123THE COURT: David Pecker's testimony regardingphone conversation with Donald Trump while David Peckerwas in the investor meeting.4MR. STEINGLASS: I think we've agreed on this56one, Judge.This would be Pages 1090, Line 15, through 1091,7Line 2.891011Page--121314151617Page(Whereupon, counsel confer.)MR. STEINGLASS: You're right. Line 20. Line 20.THE COURT:MR. STEINGLASS::through 1091, Line 20.Page 1090, Line 15, throughPage 1111, Line 21, through Page 1114, Line 16.THE COURT: That's it for the first request?MR. STEINGLASS: No.There's one more.18THE COURT:Okay.19MR. STEINGLASS:Page 1367, Line 11, through Page201370, Line 13.212223MR. STEINGLASS: Do you agree?MR. BLANCHE: Agree.THE COURT: Okay. So we're good on the first24request.25MR. STEINGLASS: Yes.Laurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

1234LO5678910111213141516171819202122232425Proceedings4894THE COURT:Let's move on to the second one.MR. STEINGLASS: I think we agree on that one,too, Judge.That's Page 1158, Line 19, to Page 1160, Line 16.And Page 1463, Line 8, to 1464, Line 15.MR. BLANCHE: Agreed.THE COURT: Third request.MR. STEINGLASS: This is the tough one.THE COURT: Let's skip the third one for now, andlet's go to the fourth.MR. STEINGLASS: Okay.The fourth one is Page 3293, Line 23, to Page3295, Line 1. And Page 3925, Line 9 through Line 16.MR. BLANCHE: Agreed.THE COURT: So, the one that is in dispute is thethird request.MR. STEINGLASS: Right.THE COURT: David Pecker's testimony regardingthe Trump Tower meeting.MR. STEINGLASS: Right.And there's about 10 or 12 different parts of thetranscript that are responsive, and I think we agree onnine of 10 of them.I'll try to go in order here.This one is confusing, and there's a lot of notesLaurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

1in here.23one.4Proceedings4895So jump in, Mr. Blanche, if I'm not getting thisLO5678Line 13.The first one, we agree, starts on Page 1017,But, we disagree about where it ends.The People believe it ends.THE COURT REPORTER: Can you give the Judge a9copy?101112131415161718192021THE COURT:Starts on Page 1017, Line 13.MR. STEINGLASS:We both agree about that.THE COURT: You disagree?MR. STEINGLASS: We disagree about where it ends.The Defense believes it ends on Page 1025, Line4. And we believe it ends on Page 1026, Line 20.(Whereupon, the Court is given the transcript.)THE COURT: Are there any other disputed areas?MR. STEINGLASS: Yes.Would you like me to go through the disputedareas or go in order?THE COURT: Let's deal with this one first, the22one that you just brought up.23Tell me what the issue is there.24MR. STEINGLASS:Is it okay if we sit for this25 conversation?Laurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Proceedings48961234THE COURT: Of course.MR. STEINGLASS: So, the issue is: This is aquestion about what happened at the Trump Tower meeting,David Pecker's testimony.56what happened to that--The disputed portion is when David Pecker relaysin that meeting to Dylan Howard,7which we believe is responsive to the request insofar as89101112131415161718he's communicating the substance of that meeting toanother person.MR. BLANCHE: Um, your Honor, we disagree.We think that if you start with Line 5, thatsays: "Did you discuss this meeting with anyoneafterwards?", that's not in response to the question.Just so your Honor is aware, both sides agreethat we would narrow the responsive portions of thetranscripts to the meeting itself and not what happenedafterwards; the execution of the meeting and what they didbecause of the meeting.19So, the question begins: "Did you discuss this2021meeting with anyone afterwards?"We believe that gets into an area that is22indirectly responsive.232425THE COURT: All right.MR. STEINGLASS: Mr. Blanche is right.We could agree that we've tried to draw a lineLaurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Proceedings48971 between the substance of the meeting and the execution of2the topics that were discussed at the meeting, which would3basically be all of Mr. Pecker's testimony.4But, I think we just disagree about whether thisLO567particular part falls into which category.THE COURT: All right.If you give me a minute, I'll read the disputed8sections.91011121314151617181920MR. STEINGLASS: Thank you.(Whereupon, a pause is taken in the proceedingswhile the Court reads the transcript.)THE COURT: I can see why Mr. Blanche has someconcerns about most of this.But, there is one question and answer that Ithink could be added. That is on Page 1026, Line 4:"Question: What did you tell him?"And this goes directly to referencing what tookplace in the meeting.Actually, it's beginning at Line 1:"Did you tell him why you asked him to keep this21arrangement secret?"22232425"Answer: Yes, I did.""Question: What did you tell him?""Answer: I told him that we were going to try tohelp the campaign, and to do this I want to keep this asLaurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Proceedings48981quiet as possible."2MR. BLANCHE:3456Even on the page before, yourHonor, if you look at 1025, starting at Line 14, it's notMr. Pecker talking about the meeting. It's him givinginstruction to Mr. Howard, asking him to notify the WestCoast Bureau Chief.7So, it's execution, as opposed to just what8happened at the meeting.9THE COURT: Mr. Steinglass.10MR. STEINGLASS:Actually, I agree that that11paragraph--it's a three-paragraph answer.12131415161718192021222324That middle paragraph seems to be beyond theresponse. I just didn't think it was practical to cut outthe middle paragraph in the middle of an answer.We could.THE COURT: So, we're in agreement that thatparagraph can be cut out?MR. STEINGLASS: Yes.THE COURT: Line 14 to Line 21.MR. STEINGLASS: Sure.MR. BLANCHE: Yes.THE COURT: We're not done.MR. BLANCHE: Understood.THE COURT: So, we're in agreement on that25 paragraph.Laurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Proceedings4899123456I think that the question on Page 1026, beginningwith Line 1, is a little different. It's not just theexecution. I think it summarizes what the plan was. Theplan was to help the campaign.So, I agree with you that the section ending at1025, Line 4, which you're in agreement with, it can end7there.89But then, I think that we can jump ahead and pickit back up on Page 1026, Lines 1 through 7.10MR. BLANCHE:Okay.11--12131415So 1026, LinesTHE COURT: 1 through 7.So, the vast majority of what you're takingexception to, I'm agreeing with you, except for thoseseven lines.1617MR. BLANCHE:Understood.That addresses our concern.181920212223THE COURT: Okay. Good.What's the next one?MR. STEINGLASS:Okay.MR. STEINGLASS: The next one is Page 1029, Line9 through 13.Keep going?24THE COURT:Sure.25MR. STEINGLASS:Page 1065, Line 16 through 24.Laurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Proceedings4900123456Page 1299, Line 23, through Page 1305, Line 5.I think that we get into our next dispute now.THE COURT:Okay.MR. STEINGLASS: Which isdo you agree with89107the parts I just said already, Mr. Blanche? Up until now,do you agree with the parts that I said so far?MR. BLANCHE: Yes.MR. STEINGLASS:Okay.So, the one we disagree with is Page 1316, Lines7, through 1319, Line 6.11This is--the Defense believes that this is12responsive.131415161718192021222324We believe, in light of the subsequent colloquythat extends for quite some time, that this is boththis issue is both confusing and difficult to correct.If you remember, there was a colloquy, and itresulted in Mr. Bove apologizing to the witness onPage 1339, Line 19, through 1340, Line 11.But, really, I don't need to repeat anything inthe colloquy about our Bornholdt objections to that.On the questioning and I think this is so--tangentially responsive to the question that it's betterto not delve back into this area.MR. BLANCHE: So, your Honor, there are two25 meetings that are in issue here that Mr. Pecker wasLaurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Proceedings49011crossed about.23The first meeting in July of 2018 is what webelieve should be included, which is 1316, Line 7, through4 1319, Line 6.LO5What happened thereafterand there was some6789objections, but the questions were allowed, and they wereanswered by the witness.Thereafter, there was another meeting discussed.There was an objection, a sidebar as it relates to that10meeting; and it resulted in the next day Mr. Bove--I11wouldn't say "apologizing"--but cleaning it up, moving12on.131415We agree with the People that that doesn't needto be included. It was too confusing.What we're offering is directly responsive, inour view, which is questions about a different meetingthat came into evidence but that wereresponsive to the question.1617that were1819202122232425either.That's the disagreement.We don't want the colloquy or the long confusion,THE COURT: So, we're in agreement that thatsecond part should not come in.MR. BLANCHE: Yes. Yes.THE COURT: Let's deal with the first part.Laurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Proceedings49021MR. STEINGLASS: I'm not sure that weare in2agreement about that.3456What we're saying is none of it should come in,and if the first part is going to come in, the second partshould come in because it contextualizes what happens inthe second part.7THE COURT: Where is the second part?8The first one is Page 1316, Line 7, through 1319,9Line 6.10111213But, I would14151617181920What is the second part?MR. STEINGLASS: The second part is the apologyon 1339, Line 19, through 1340, Line 11.in order to give context to thatapology, I would ask your Honor to review the colloquy.Even if we don't decide this while we're sittinghere and need to think about it, I think the colloquyexplains exactly why we think this is misleading andshould not come in.THE COURT: Okay.For the sake of time, I'll take this with me and21consider it.222324MR. STEINGLASS: Thank you.THE COURT: What else?MR. STEINGLASS:Next. 1345, Lines 5 through 13.25THE COURT: I'm sorry.Laurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

1234Proceedings1345.MR. STEINGLASS:1345, Lines 5 through 13.MR. BLANCHE: Hang on one second.(Whereupon, Mr. Blanche and Mr. Steinglass4903LO5confer.)678910111213MR. BLANCHE: We're ready.My mistake.MR. STEINGLASS: This is not disputed.1345, Lines 5 through 13. 1346, Lines 12 through16. And 1347, Lines 2 through 8.THE COURT: Those last two are disputed?MR. BLANCHE: No. No dispute.MR. STEINGLASS: We then have 1357, Lines 7141516through 16. 1359, Lines 7 through 15. 1432, Lines 5through 21. 1473, Line 3 through 19. And 1482, Lines 1through 16.17Didget all that right?181920212223MR. BLANCHE: Yes.But, one more disputed.MR. STEINGLASS: Right.That's 1401; right?MR. BLANCHE: Right.MR. STEINGLASS: There's one more dispute that we24 have, which is on Page 1401, Lines 10 through 12.2525And we believe that this falls into the executionLaurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

1234Proceedingscategory, not the substance of the meeting category.THE COURT: All right.So, there's two disputed areas that remain.The first one is 1316, Line 7, through 1319,4904LO5Line 6.6789And the People submitted that if that were tocome in, then the apology should also come in, which is1339, Line 19, through 1340, Line 11.Although, it's your position that neither one10should come in.111213MR. STEINGLASS:Right.THE COURT: And the second one that's in disputeis 1301, Line 10 through Line 12.14MR. STEINGLASS:Exactly.151617181920212223MR. BLANCHE: Yes.THE COURT: I'll take this with me to Chambers,and I'll let you guys know what I think.What I would ask you, before you leave tonight,if you could please write this out neatly, give it to thecourt reporters so we're prepared to go at 9:30 tomorrow.MR. STEINGLASS: Will do.MR. BLANCHE: Not to belabor the one disagreementpoint, we think that the apology goes to a different24 meeting.25If the Court, ultimately, disagrees with what weLaurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Proceedings49051believe, then we would agree with the People that neither2should go in.3So, we don't want 1367 through 1396 and the4LO5678910111213141516apology. We don't think the apology applies.THE COURT: So, the third request dealt,specifically, with the Trump Tower meeting. That's the onemeeting they're requesting information about.MR. BLANCHE: Yes, Judge. That's right.THE COURT: How many pages are we talking about,in total, roughly?MR. STEINGLASS: If you give me one minute.THE COURT: Sure.(Whereupon, a pause is taken in the proceedings.)MR. STEINGLASS: There's a lot of little snippetsthat are not very long.I would say it looks like somewhere in the17vicinity of 35 pages.18THE COURT: Okay.19Looking at the one on Page 1401--I didn't write20down who wants it and who doesn't want it, so aswe had21this discussion, I don't have any idea.222324Reading Line 10: "And you did not consider StormyDaniels' story to be a part of any agreement that you hadin August 2015; correct?"2525"Answer: That's correct."Laurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Proceedings49061234LO56789101112131415161718So, that question and that answer arespecifically referring to something that was not a part ofthe Trump Tower meeting, so why would that be included?MR. STEINGLASS: We don't think it should be.MR. BLANCHE: Well, your Honor, the question asksfor any testimony referring about the Trump Towermeeting. So, that's testimony about the meeting, even ifit includes something that didn't happen at the meeting.It's not execution.THE COURT: A lot of things didn't happen at thatmeeting. A lot of things. We can start looking through thetranscript and find all the things that didn't happen atthat meeting.According to your logic, that would be responsiveto the question.Go ahead.MR. BLANCHE: No. I don't think so.If there's a question about the meeting, about19 what was said.202122232425But, there's a question about what was not saidat the meeting as it relates to the evidence in the case.That's still responsive to the question.I understand what the Court is saying. That wouldmean anything could come in.But, that's not true.Laurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

Proceedings490712The question is directly about what happened atthe August meeting, and then a question about what wasn't3said.4So, what was said, what wasn't said, we wouldMay I say one thing about that,THE COURT: Of course.LO5argue that's responsive.6THE COURT: Let me read the area before that and78the area after that, the surrounding testimony, and I'llhave a better sense of it.9MR. STEINGLASS:10Judge?11121314151617181920MR. STEINGLASS: This meeting happened in 2015.There was no Stormy Daniels to discuss in 2015.If we're discussing how the meeting was put intoeffect with all the three subsequent individuals, none ofthem were discussed by name at that meeting because theydidn't exist yet in terms of the catch-and-kill plan.So, this is why we feel this is about execution,subsequently, over the subsequent months and should fallinto the category of execution, rather than content at themeeting.THE COURT: What do you think about that?MR. BLANCHE: I still think the same point21222324applies.25It's not--the question is about the evidenceLaurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter

123SH45678910111213141516171819202122232425Proceedings4908that came in at this trial about the meeting. And that,necessarily, in our view, should include something thatwasn't discussed at the meeting. That's right.But, their question wasn't about the naturalconsequence of the question about the meeting.It was just: Tell us everything about themeeting. So...THE COURT: I'll think about both of those.MR. STEINGLASS:Thank you.THE COURT: When you finish jotting down thelisting of the pages and you give it to Laurie, can youplease send Steve and I a copy?MR. STEINGLASS: Sure.MR. BLANCHE: Sure.THE COURT: See you tomorrow morning at 9:30.(Whereupon, the case is adjourned to May 30th,2024 at 9:30 AM.)Laurie Eisenberg, CSR, RPRSenior Court Reporter