Fox News legal analyst and George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley blasted New York Judge Juan Merchan for losing control of the courtroom following Tuesday’s disastrous testimony of adult film star Stormy Daniels.
Daniels on Tuesday gave testimony about her alleged affair with former President Donald Trump. Trump’s lawyer objected to her testimony and asked Merchan not to allow her to testify on the intimate details of their alleged affair. Merchan, however, overruled that defense’s objection.
Today is day 13 of Trump’s trial, and I’m back at the Manhattan courthouse.
Stormy Daniels is likely to testify today, her attorney told AP.
Follow this thread for updates @DailyCaller pic.twitter.com/vRvNLMsr7j
— Katelynn Richardson (@katesrichardson) May 7, 2024
However, things took a dramatic turn after Daniels started to testify about the intimate details of their affair, forcing Merchan to step in.
“I agree that it would have been better if some of these things had been left unsaid,” Merchan said.
Stormy Daniels is about to called in New York, who sought to sell her story on Trump and received payment for a NDA. It is not clear what she offers beyond salacious details to embarrass Trump. The NDA is not in dispute…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 7, 2024
Turley, while speaking in a Tuesday interview on Fox News, blasted Merchan for “pretending” to be shocked about Daniels’ testimony.
You know, the statement of the judge, that he’s surprised there isn’t a higher number of objections from the defense is baffling, Turley said. “The defense objected to putting her on the stand. They then objected to the scope of the questioning, and now the judge sounds like Claude Rains saying I’m shocked, shocked there’s a porn star in my courtroom. Well, you know, if you give a lot of scope to testimony, what did you expect? And the problem with what the judge has done here is that this is an entirely unnecessary witness. It is uncontested that there’s an NDA, whether what happened in their relationship, if there was one, is immaterial to how those payments were denoted by the Trump campaign. So the court had the opportunity repeatedly to say we are not going to take this courtroom through details of this relationship. If you want to establish a relationship occurred, do so. Establish the dates, it’s likely those facts could have been stipulated to. So, the prosecutors wanted to get salacious details out.”
Turley, who maintained that Daniels’ testimony was only a way to punish Trump, insisted that Merchan lost control of the court.
“This is a form of punishment. They are trying to use a witness for punitive purposes and, in my view, political purposes, and this is what happens,” Turley added. “It happened because the judge lost control of his courtroom. You know, you really can’t have this cat walk backward. The judge knows that, the prosecutors know that, but what the prosecutors are arguing here is completely ridiculous.”
