Legal Analyst on CNN Says Prosecution ‘Fell Way Short’ Of Proving Case Against Trump -

Home Principles About Contact

Terms Privacy GDPR FAQ

Defense attorney Randy Zelin argued that the prosecution in former President Donald Trump’s hush money case “fell way short” of meeting its evidentiary burden ahead of closing arguments on CNN Tuesday morning.

“The burden of proof is an important one to remind everyone: It’s on the prosecution, right? They need to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he commit — that Donald Trump broke the law. And you think after listening to all of this, you think they fell short. How?” the network’s Kate Bolduan asked Zelin.

“They fell way short, because let’s start with reasonable doubt,” replied the legal analyst. “What is reasonable doubt? And it’s not simply a doubt based upon reason. Any time a human being needs to make an important decision in life, if you have enough information, for example, doctor says you need open heart surgery. ‘Doc, go ahead and schedule. I don’t have a reasonable doubt.’ Conversely, if I say ‘I appreciate it, but I need a second opinion, I need more information,’ that is having a reasonable doubt. There is reasonable doubt all over this case.”