Trump: Jury Given Opportunity to Revive Dented Lady Justice

OPINION 

(Editor’s Note: The following opinion column does not respresent an endorsement of any political party or candidate on the part of Newsmax.) 

Since the late 18th century, the United States Constitution has provided such foundational legal protections as due process, freedom from unreasonable search or seizure, the right to trial by jury, and the right to confront one’s accusers.

These principles were enshrined in our Bill of Rights, with our entire justice system built on the premise that one is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

These essential concepts are symbolized by Lady Justice, often depicted blindfolded, carrying a scale and a sword.

The blindfold signifies that justice is impartial, based on actions rather than identity. Lady Justice represents the various elements of the justice system, including an unbiased jury and professional prosecutors who present evidence without bias.

Partisan politics undermine this fair justice system, yet Democrats are increasingly using the legal system in a manner reminiscent of some of King George’s abuses that led to the American Declaration of Independence.

Former President Donald J. Trump was indicted in New York City last year, facing multiple charges related to business records falsification to conceal another offense.

The indictment stemmed from a non-disclosure agreement his lawyer negotiated with Stormy Daniels in 2016.

If convicted, Trump could face a lengthy prison sentence.

It was a historic indictment of a former president.

However, upon closer examination, legal experts found significant flaws in the indictment, particularly that misdemeanor charges were time-barred and could not be pursued by 2023.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg introduced a mystery felony into the indictment without specifying the crime, raising concerns about unfair trial tactics.

Throughout the trial, evidence of the alleged felony crime remained absent, exposing the case’s partisan nature and lack of substantive proof against Trump.

Witnesses testified about the non-disclosure agreement but failed to provide evidence of criminal wrongdoing by Trump.

The trial’s partisan nature became evident, with questionable witness testimonies and a lack of concrete evidence against Trump.

Despite the legal flaws and absence of substantial evidence, the prosecution continued to pursue the case against Trump, relying on disreputable witnesses like Michael Cohen.

This case represents a dangerous assault on the justice system, with potential implications for future political prosecutions.

The New York jury has an opportunity to uphold justice by examining the evidence impartially. Failure to do so could weaken the justice system and set a troubling precedent for future cases.

Francey Hakes is a former state and federal prosecutor and is co-host of the true crime podcast “Best Case Worst Case.”