Manhattan prosecutor Joshua Steinglass’ attempt to reenact a phone call during former President Donald Trump’s criminal hush money trial has received criticism from legal expert Elie Honig. During the closing arguments, Steinglass aimed to bolster testimony from Trump’s former fixer Michael Cohen by reenacting a call submitted into evidence.
However, Honig, appearing on CNN, dismissed the prosecutor’s theatrics as unnecessary. ” The bit with the phone is a good piece of stagecraft,” Honig said. “But it’s also a cheap gimmick that’s not the point of what Michael Cohen got caught in there.” “It was a very clean story: ‘I just called Donald Trump,” Honig said.
Steinglass was supporting Cohen’s account of a call made to Trump, but Honig argued that the reenactment was superfluous. During cross-examination, Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche had attempted to challenge Cohen’s version of the call by adding another element: Cohen had been seeking help from Trump’s then-bodyguard Keith Schiller regarding a 14-year-old crank caller, told The New York Times.
Steinglass’ reenactment aimed to demonstrate to the jury that Cohen could have discussed both the prankster and the hush money payments during a 96-second phone call. Despite the prosecutor’s efforts, Honig suggested that the jury did not need such theatrics to understand Cohen’s testimony.
Steinglass’ approach was intended to show that Cohen’s conversation with Trump was plausible within the short duration of the call. However, Honig’s critique highlighted that relying on such dramatic presentations might detract from the substantive legal arguments.
As the trial progresses, Steinglass’ tactics have sparked debate over the effectiveness of courtroom theatrics versus straightforward legal presentation. With Trump’s former fixer playing a crucial role in the case, the prosecution’s strategy remains under scrutiny as they aim to secure a conviction.