Retired New York Supreme Court Judge Diane Kiesel recently provided insights on the ongoing testimony involving a call on October 24th at 8:02 p.m. during the trial. The defense's line of questioning aimed to challenge Michael Cohen's credibility by scrutinizing his recollection of details, particularly regarding Trump's communications.
Judge Kiesel noted that the defense's strategy appeared to focus on undermining Cohen's credibility to cast doubt on his testimony. She highlighted the defense's efforts to paint Cohen in a negative light before delving into critical details, suggesting a tactic to raise skepticism about his reliability as a witness.
Reflecting on her experience as a former District Attorney, Judge Kiesel emphasized the importance of presenting witnesses as they are, acknowledging their flaws while emphasizing the significance of distinguishing between material and tangential falsehoods. She mentioned the potential for the defense to request an 'interested witness charge' due to Cohen's admitted stake in the case's outcome.
Judge Kiesel highlighted the pivotal role of the jury in evaluating the testimony, emphasizing that they hold the ultimate decision-making power in determining the credibility of witnesses. She underscored that while the jury is not obligated to dismiss testimony from an interested witness, they also have the discretion to question and evaluate the veracity of the information presented.
The trial's progression underscores the complex interplay between witness credibility, legal strategies, and the jury's critical role in assessing the evidence. Judge Kiesel's analysis sheds light on the nuanced dynamics at play in high-stakes legal proceedings, where the jury's discernment ultimately shapes the outcome of the case.
