close
close
migores1

Trump’s evidence in the Jan. 6 case could be released before Election Day

A U.S. District Judge for the District of Columbia said Thursday that he will not consider the upcoming election when setting the timeline for former President Donald Trump’s criminal case related to his alleged efforts to undermine the results of the 2020 election.

While Trump is still unlikely to see a day in court before Nov. 5, the public may get a chance to see new evidence in the case, such as grand jury transcripts, before it goes to the polls, legal experts said for Business Insider.

“I think it’s very possible that there will be some new information that will come out long before there is actual testimony in the trial,” Robert Weisberg, a criminal law professor at Stanford Law School, told BI.

During a court hearing Thursday, Judge Tanya S. Chutkan set a timeline for several filings from prosecutors and the defense. In setting the deadlines, the judge made it clear that “the court is not concerned with the election schedule,” The Washington Post reported.

Such a deadline requires special counsel Jack Smith’s team to file a brief on the former president’s immunity by Sept. 26 in light of a recent Supreme Court ruling that granted the president partial immunity for official acts he undertook in during the mandate.

Alex Reinert, an expert in criminal and constitutional law at the Cardozo School of Law, told BI that those files may include new evidence.

“I expect there will be evidence that I haven’t seen included in the files,” he said. “I just don’t know if it’s going to be publicly available or if it’s just for the judge and the defense.”

Trump’s legal team tried to prevent the evidence from being made public until after the election.

A representative for the former president did not immediately respond to a request for comment from BI.

Neama Rahmani, president of West Coast Trial Lawyers and a former federal prosecutor, said any new evidence offered by the prosecution would most likely be part of the public record.

“If it’s part of these motions, the election doesn’t really matter,” Rahmani said. “It’s evidence that’s part of a motion, so it should be public.”

Some evidence, however, could be sealed or redacted at the judge’s discretion, Weisberg, a Stanford law professor, told BI.

Rahmani said Trump’s defense attorneys will also try to prevent new evidence from being presented, but may not be successful.

Last month, Smith filed a superseding indictment in the case that removed some of the charges that could be considered protected by presidential immunity.

Related Articles

Back to top button