After $80 Million Verdict, Trump Has a Jury Problem Ahead of Criminal Trial
SlateDespite my being a regular and caustic critic of the courtroom tactics and performances of Donald Trump and his lawyers, Friday’s whopping verdict against the former president in the second E. Jean Carroll civil case requires me to acknowledge that in this instance, they were right about one thing. Team Trump’s strategic decision to seek to avoid the result of the first Carroll trial—a verdict of $5 million against the former president, who was a no-show during that trial—by having him regularly appear and testify in the second Carroll trial did indeed bring about a different result. In a recent Slate article, I opined that what happens in Kaplan’s courtroom in the Carroll civil case would be an important guidepost for Judge Tanya Chutkan as to the most effective methods of keeping a uniquely uncontrollable defendant under control, with Chutkan presiding over the far more significant 2020 election interference trial in Washington. The events and results of the second Carroll trial should also be a significant guidepost for Trump’s attorneys in the D.C. case, John Lauro and Todd Blanche—two former federal prosecutors with far more experience and skill than the Trump attorneys in the state and federal civil cases.