In the silent turmoil of the courtroom, the atmosphere oscillates between torpor and palpable tension. On the 15th floor of an old courthouse in Manhattan, a jury of seven men and five women, led by an American of Irish origin, is considering the fate of Donald Trump. The suspense is at its height as the deliberations will resume Thursday morning.
The shrill sound of an alarm abruptly interrupted Wednesday’s gloomy afternoon, sending lawyers, court members, police and journalists rushing to their seats. Trump enters, pulling on his lapels. Sporting his signature extra-long tie, but a flamboyant gold rather than his campaign red “Make America Great Again.”
The alarm does not signal a verdict in this silence payment trial that could tarnish the reputation of the 45th president by convicting him of a crime. It’s a request from the jury to reread several complex and dense testimonies, including those from former tabloid mogul David Pecker and Michael Cohen, a former Trump henchman. The key question is Trump’s intent in seeking to suppress scandalous accounts of his private life linked to the payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels, facilitated by Cohen under orders from his boss. (Trump has denied the alleged affair with Daniels and is pleading not guilty.)
As the judge and attorneys delve into the jumbled transcripts, a new jury call asks for a reading of Merchan’s instructions, delivered with painstaking care that morning. The wait is becoming heavy, speculation is rife. The jury’s desire to analyze the testimony suggests that the verdict is not imminent, underscoring the scale of their responsibility in a trial crucial to Trump’s honor and the future of the country.
The jury’s demands highlight the central issue in this lawsuit, which uses an innovative interpretation of the law to try to hold Trump responsible for the 2016 presidential campaign. To convict him of a misdemeanor, the jury must prove that he falsified documents to hide another crime, without having to specify its nature. The indictment cites tax violations and attempts to falsify other documents, suggesting that Trump may have violated election law by using “unlawful” means to deprive someone of an election victory.
With his gaze fixed on the judge, Trump watches the reading of the accusations with an expression that is by turns contemptuous and dark. The hours drag on, the suspense builds. Stuck in this courtroom, Trump, accustomed to navigating the splendor of his luxurious residences, now appears confronted with a striking power imbalance revealed by this trial.
Far from his usual bubble of deference as a former president, Trump finds himself at the mercy of these twelve New York citizens. This immeasurable contrast reveals a side of his personality that the general public can rarely grasp. The wheel of justice turns, slowly but inexorably, and the outcome of this historic trial will forever mark the destiny of the impetuous former leader.