Trump’s Testimony Would “Significantly Increase” The Likelihood Of His Conviction, Says Former Lawyer

( — On Monday April 22, former president Donald Trump’s hush money trial in New York finally commenced. Trump has denied having a relationship with the former adult actress Stormy Daniels and pleaded not guilty to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. Tim Parlatore, one of Trump’s former attorneys, has commented that if Trump chooses to take the stand in his own defense, it could backfire by increasing his chances of conviction.

Parlatore was asked if it was likely Trump would take the stand when he appeared on CNN’s program The Source with host Kaitlan Collins. Parlatore replied that such a decision would be Trump’s choice, but when Collins asked if he thought it would help or harm his case, he was more decisive. Without any hesitation, he declared that such a move on the former president’s part would “significantly increase” the likelihood the jury would convict him. He suggested that if the jury distrusted anything he said while on the stand, no matter how insignificant, they would carry that distrust into deliberations.

For his part, the ex-president has claimed that he will take the stand because, as he told reporters on April 12, he “tells the truth.” Former U.S. attorney, Joyce Vance, however, agrees with Parlatore that Trump taking the stand is ill-advised. In a post on her Substack blog, she pointed out that few defendants take the stand in their own defense. She admitted that while she would enjoy watching former president Trump cross-examined by a relentless and skilled prosecution team, he probably shouldn’t do it. Vance, along with others, has expressed the opinion that Trump’s legal team will do everything they can to prevent him from taking the stand.

The jury selection was finalized last week, and arguments and testimony have begun. One of the prosecution’s lawyers made the argument that the $130,000 payment to Daniels would constitute election fraud in the 2016 election. Trump’s defense referred to their client as being “cloaked in innocence.” Former publisher of The National Enquirer, David Pecker gave testimony, under immunity from prosecution, that his tabloid had purchased the rights to negative stories about Trump but then chose not to publish them. Whether Trump ultimately speaks on his own behalf remains to be seen.

Copyright 2024,