Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

Donald Trump's Hush Money Trial; Digital Forensics Expert on the Stand in Trump's Hush Money Trial; Paralegal at the Manhattan DA's Office Called In for Questioning. Aired 10:30-11a ET

Aired May 03, 2024 - 10:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[10:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

JIM ACOSTA, CNN NEWSROOM ANCHOR: All right. Welcome back to our special coverage of the Trump trial. No evidence of tampering. A prosecution digital forensics expert is still on the stand after giving important answers. Just a few moments ago, he's testifying about Michael Cohen's devices and if the evidence gleaned from those cell phones can be trusted.

Let me go to you, Elie, on this because we've been watching these clips pop up on screen during the commercial break. There's this back and forth between the attorneys and this forensic expert about whether or not Michael Cohen's phone could be trusted.

Just a few moments ago, he was saying no evidence of manipulation or tampering, but at the same time, Bove going back on cross-examination, saying, hold on a second. Do you see gaps in the audio? This has been going back and forth. They're trying to shoot holes in the credibility of this audio, which is obviously, as you were saying a few moments ago --

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK: Crucial

ACOSTA: -- perhaps the most crucial piece of evidence in this case.

HONIG: Yes, so people understand what happens here. This witness, Mr. Daus, he works for the D.A.'s Office. He's an investigator. He specializes in digital forensics. He went through two of Michael Cohen's cell phones from back when this was all happening. The way he got those cell phones is the FBI sees them. Remember, the FBI did search warrants on Michael Cohen. They grabbed these two cell phones. So, this witness has now gone through these -- the data, includes text, e-mails, and the audio recordings.

And the defense is trying to poke holes in that. They're saying, well, is it reliable? Do you know who handled this? Or is there the possibility that certain things were cut off, or left out, or manipulated?

[10:35:00]

And essentially, the bottom line from this witness seems to be, I've not seen any specific evidence that there was manipulation. But there also could have been in a way that I can't detect or there was at least the opportunity for some manipulation. And I think another point that the defense is trying to make is you have no idea what preceded this recording or what happened right after. It just sort of cuts off, sort of, abruptly. There we go.

ACOSTA: Daus is off the stand. But Elliot, I mean, how critical is this exchange? I mean, obviously they're talking to -- and to Carolyn, you as well. They're talking to the jurors here about a very critical piece of evidence.

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST AND FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, OBAMA ADMINISTRATION: Yes, certainly. It's critical for the purposes of the defense because one of the strongest things a defense team can do is just at least post, I'm just saying. May --

ACOSTA: Just asking questions.

WILLIAMS: Just asking questions.

ACOSTA: Yes.

WILLIAMS: Maybe this evidence is -- doesn't have the integrity that you think it does. So, there's a couple of things going on. Number one, this concept of what's called chain of custody in the law. Where was every step along the way that this piece of evident went -- evidence went, and was it tampered with along the way? And is it authentic? Is it the thing that you say it is?

Now, look, common sense says, even as the witness says, I have no reason to believe that there's anything tampered with this. But as we were talking about in the break, in the age of A.I., and deepfakes --

ACOSTA: Right.

WILLIAMS: -- and so on, it is very important to lock up in front of a jury. Is this thing what you say it is? And I think the defense will return to this, you know, in its closing or whatever.

ACOSTA: Yes, Carolyn. What do you think?

CAROLYN KOCH, TRIAL AND JURY CONSULTANT: Well, you know, the devil's always in the details. And there's a lot of word parsing, you know. What is the meaning of is? What is a relationship? I have no reason to believe. Well, what would be a reason? Would this be a reason? Well, yes, that would be a reason. And then all of a sudden, you know, there goes your Jenga tower.

So, it is critical to the jury because the jury's looking for indicia of reliability. And they will know, if they don't already know that Michael Cohen has some credibility problems. So -- and just because the jury's instructed if you lie about A, you lie about everything. Jurors don't necessarily do that. And the jury instructions, you know, they're all very well and good. But jurors are going to do what they think is right.

And if Cohen does manage to strike a court of credibility, he's going to have to be credible to 12 people on really important issues like did he tamper?

ACOSTA: And Trump, apparently, hit Bove's arm and gestured for him to get back up to the podium, but the attorney shook his head no.

WILLIAMS: No, and you know what --

ACOSTA: Jamie, somebody said no to Donald Trump.

JAMIE GANGEL, CNN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: Donald Trump, as we all know, thinks he's -- his best expert and legal advice but --

ACOSTA: And attorney, apparently.

GANGEL: And attorney. But Bove thought otherwise, you know, just to go back to Carolyn's point about what juries think. I just keep going back to what the bar is here, which is beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a high bar. And we don't know what's going to happen. We don't know what evidence is coming. But there is always --

ACOSTA: And there's -- we're just being told, Georgia Longstreet called to the stand. Apparently, a paralegal at the DA's office.

GANGEL: OK.

ACOSTA: So, putting the pieces of the puzzle together there.

GANGEL: But at the end of the day, if you're likely to have, let's say, a hung jury, that one or two holdouts, I think it's moments like this when we didn't hear the whole audio tape.

KOCH: Right.

GANGEL: What was said after that?

KOCH: Right.

GANGEL: It can raise suspicion, skepticism --

KOCH: Yes.

GANGEL: -- to hitting that bar beyond a reasonable doubt.

WILLIAMS: This whole -- you know, we chuckle about Trump tapping his lawyer on the arm and telling him to go up, and there is --

ACOSTA: There are a couple of moments like this.

WILLIAMS: There's a couple of moments like that.

ACOSTA: Yes, yes, yes.

WILLIAMS: And take this out of Donald Trump. So, there's an important point here. You don't -- as a prosecutor or even as a defense attorney, you don't have to take every opportunity to argue. They probably could have gone back up for a recross of the witness. You can, you know, examination, cross-examination, redirects, recross. But you don't have to.

And if there's nothing new that could be gained from questioning the witness again, just sit down because you risk stepping it -- stepping in it in front of the jury. And I think maybe that's probably what was happening there when the attorney waved his client off. It happens all the time.

HONIG: If I can just --

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN U.S. NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: And one thing we know about Donald Trump is that he has privately said that he doesn't think his attorneys are being aggressive enough. Now, everyone that I have talked to says this is just the way Donald Trump talks. There's no conversation about getting rid of them or cycling someone new in. That he actually likes these attorneys. But he wants to see them be more aggressive.

And if you look at what the last question was, Conway asking that if something were to happen, essentially, like you had a phone in your pocket and there was a call, could that have cut off the audio? Would you -- would it show up in a call log? Because that would be one maybe explanation of why the tape cut off.

Everyone smirked, including the judge, these are from our reporters in the courtroom, including Bove. Then you see Donald Trump tapping him like, get back up there. Like, I'm not going to step in it. He asked his question. But we know that Donald Trump wants him to be continuing to press them at every turn.

ACOSTA: Anybody who works with Donald Trump is tied up into a pretzel. I mean, they get tied up in knots. We saw that in the audio yesterday when Trump was saying the gag order prevents me from testifying. And the -- and his lawyers, Todd Blanche, is next to him, nodding and shaking his head all in the same moment. Not knowing what to make of what Donald Trump is saying at any particular moment.

[10:40:00]

HONIG: It's an age-old push and pull. Many clients want their defense lawyers to be constantly on the attack. But good lawyers -- and by the way, both Todd Blanche and Emil Bove came from the Southern District of New York where I was raised as a prosecutor. They know if you have a good piece of testimony, just leave it as is. You don't do a dance on it. And to the --

ACOSTA: And she, apparently, identified publicly available materials relevant to Donald Trump's case, including social media posts and news articles.

HONIG: So, I was going to talk about -- yes, Georgia Longstreet is not a familiar name. She's apparently a paralegal with the DA's office. Typically, you would call a paralegal -- I've done this a few times, just to do basic mechanics.

Yes, this is an article that appeared in the "New York Post" on such and such a day. This is a tweet or a Truth Social that was sent on such and such a date. Sometimes paralegals will also do summary information. For example, I looked at this massive phone records and in there, there's 48 calls between Donald Trump and Michael Cohen.

ACOSTA: But as mundane as that sounds, Elie, I have to wonder if we're being set up for perhaps by the end of the day, we're going to get a headline witness. We're going to get a Stormy Daniels. We're going to get a Hope Hicks. There -- you can't think that the prosecutor is going to end the day with just, sort of, this humdrum audio recordings, documents, news articles.

KOCH: I think they're waiting too long.

ACOSTA: Don't you want to send the juries --

KOCH: I mean --

ACOSTA: -- the jurors home with something to think about over the weekend?

KOCH: Is it day nine now?

ACOSTA: Yes, yes.

KOCH: I mean, the jurors are, you know, it's like they've got lives, too, to get back to. And so, where is --

ACOSTA: I came here for a trial involving Donald Trump. Where's --

KOCH: We need the shoe to drop. And I think if the prosecution just keeps waiting -- again, this is just my opinion because, you know, we're not the jury. But it could be anti-climactic if they wait too long. And it's going to have to be good. And I know a lot of lawyers will strategize that they want, you know, the bombshell to be at the end, but it's really going to have to be a bomb.

Otherwise -- I mean, they say, oh, juries make up their mind in opening statement. They don't. They do not. They absolutely do not. That was some study 20 years ago. It -- talk to jurors, they do not do that. Not in a big case. Not even in a small case, unless it's completely crappy. But these jurors want to have something to sink their teeth into.

ACOSTA: All right. We'll leave that as the tease. They're going into break. Guys, thank you very much. Great conversation.

Coming up next, a new witness, Georgia Longstreet, as Ellie was saying a few moments ago, she's a paralegal for the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. Our reporters inside the court tell us Trump is watching intently, scribbling notes to his defense team.

Also tapping his -- nudging his lawyers to go do more. Do more. So, something happening in the courtroom there. We'll tell you about that on the other side of the bridge. Stay with us. You're watching live coverage here on CNN of the trial. Stick with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:45:00]

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR, THE SOURCE AND CNN CHIEF CORRESPONDENT: You're watching CNN's special live coverage. On the stand right now is a paralegal for the Manhattan District Attorney who says she has scrolled through five to 10,000 social media post relevant to the former president of the United States. God bless her. The prosecution is having her explain to the jury what Twitter is. What your social is? What the Wayback Machine is.

Welcome to a trial of the year of our Lord 2024. OK. I'm going to -- not make any more religious references. That was two in one intro.

We have our panel back here with us. We also have Robert Hirschhorn, who is a jury consultant and attorney. And Robert, let me start with you, actually, because some people may be at home wondering why is there a paralegal on the witness stand having to explain what Twitter is, what Truth Social is, what the Wayback Machine is. And for people who don't know, that it is a website where you can basically go and see what a website looks like on a certain date in case it was changed, scrubbed, anything was deleted. Why is it important for this to be explained to the jury?

ROBERT HIRSCHHORN, JURY CONSULTANT AND LAWYER: Yes, Kaitlan, thanks for having me. Look, the prosecution's dotting their i's, crossing their t's. They're going through the checklist. Here's the reality, folks, none of these matters to the jury. We're at day 11 of this trial. They're looking for the evidence that connects a crime to the defendant.

Kaitlan, I got to tell you, 11 days in, the jury hasn't seen it yet. So, they should hurry up and start getting to the stuff that matters to the jury. But this doesn't.

COLLINS: But what about the argument that we've heard that they're kind of laying the groundwork here to get to that. And that's why they're introducing the figures like David Pecker and Keith Davidson to kind of explain that. And if we do expect Hope Hicks to take the stand, maybe this afternoon, it's not clear to us yet. Som we often find out when they're actually walking inside the courtroom. I mean, she is someone who would -- would she not be able to more closely tie this to Mr. Trump himself?

HIRSCHHORN: Sure. But look, look at who the defendant is. He's a grumpy old man. He's like a petulant child. He's this really powerful person. He has fixers, right? He's not the kind of guy that's going to give very explicit instructions on the reason we're going to pay this money is to influence the election.

The state needs that kind of evidence. And they just -- I mean, unless they have a video that we haven't seen or heard yet, Kaitlan, I'm telling you, you got a really spark jury there. The kind of jurors that may not vote for Trump as president, but they might very well vote for him as a defendant.

So, the state better start pitching in stuff that links Trump to this. What they're doing is, they're building a house and if they're not -- if they don't do it quickly, the people are going to move out of the house and not be interested in the state's case.

COLLINS: Do you think that's the case? Because you make a good point. This is a savvy jury. We know, you know, their profiles, their demographics. I mean, this is a group who, when I was in the courtroom on Tuesday, they were paying very close attention to what is happening.

[10:50:00]

I mean, at one point, it almost looked like they were watching a tennis match as they were watching the prosecutor and the witness go back and forth with the question and answers as they were looking closely to each one. And, you know, I think we've been talking about Michael Cohen's credibility. We're all aware with the issues of that, but we don't actually know yet how believable the jury will find Michael Cohen to be.

HIRSCHHORN: Oh, he's toast. OK. And unless they have really strong corroborating evidence, I promise you, this jury is not going to convict this defendant based on the word of his fixer. And here's what's interesting, Kaitlan, I heard a lot of pundits talking about this, how the jury was fixated on the question and the answer. Nobody was looking at the defendant. Nobody was looking at the former president because sometimes jurors will look at the defendant to see how they're reacting to that information. Nobody's doing it.

Guess what? Trump is like out of the picture. And if the prosecution wants to have any chance of winning this case, they better make him front and center and it better be stuff that goes directly to the charges in this case.

COLLINS: Yes, we'll see what they choose to do with their afternoon. We still have several more hours ahead. Robert, thank you for that.

And Paula Reid and Laura Coates are also back here with me. And Paula, what it seems they were doing by having this paralegal? You know, they've taken a break now, and the jury is leaving their room, the judge has left their room, Trump has left their room. This paralegal seemed to be basically trying to explain and set them up so they can bring in what Trump has been saying. I mean, he's talked about Story Daniels and Michael Cohen, the people at the heart of this case a ton.

PAULA REID, CNN SENIOR LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, exactly. This is another one of these witnesses who has to come in because the Trump team won't stipulate to the evidence the prosecutors need to bring in. And look, putting aside the legal significance, you just -- you kind of feel for these people.

This is the biggest story in the world. These are two people that we've heard from today who work at the Manhattan DA's office. They're not used to this kind of attention. I mean, remember the C-SPAN archivist? He got on the -- he came -- flew in from Indiana. He got on the stand and he said, yes, I'm really nervous. I mean, for a lot of people who live their life far away from the spotlight to be involved in this, it has got to be incredibly stressful. But her role is just to help the prosecutors get in all these social media posts that they need to have as part of their case.

COLLINS: And Laura, what do you see as the strategy here? Just given your, you know, deep familiarity with the courtroom and how they're structuring which witness they're bringing in. Because it seems like they bring in someone who really has a lot of salacious things to say, who was really in on one-on-one conversations.

David Pecker testified directly about Donald Trump, and -- but then they'll bring in someone who can explain what Twitter and Truth Social and bring in Trump social media post. I mean, they seem to be kind of dabbling it in for the jury.

LAURA COATES, CNN SENIOR AND CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR, AND SIRIUSXM HOST, "THE LAURA COATES SHOW": Well, they are well aware of the clock. They know it's Friday. They know that the weekend is looming. And they're going to have to have an opportunity for the jury to think about what is less and fresh in their mind.

Remember, the whole strategy, if you're presenting evidence, presenting a story, primacy and recency and repetition. What you heard first and last are going to be the most impactful. And what you continuously hear, you add credibility and give further gravitas to.

They know they want to get whoever comes in the afternoon, that they want a time as such that the direct examination, possibly, will carry over until the Monday. That's a strategy of thinking who they want to have. They don't want to have a cross and try to tear down one of their witnesses in any way, or leave it even at an objection.

But also, we've also talked about how delay, delay, delay was a tactic for the Trump litigation team. Prosecution team, wants to expedite the entire thing. But delay does not stop once the trial actually begins. It is within the best interest of the defense to continue to try to delay that much longer.

The longer it takes to get all the evidence through, the more that you have a witness coming in and explaining to people what Truth Social and Twitter is, and perhaps the Wayback -- I mean, I get the Wayback Machine. It sounds very back to the future and I don't know if they're going to have -- a doctor's going to come. I mean, maybe DeLorean's coming at a point in time.

But all of it is important to have them suggest, hold on, if I'm the jury, the defense wants you thinking, for this I got up in the morning. For this I got called jury duty. For this, you know, I had to rush through my coffee. For this we're indicting a president of the United States -- a former president of the United States.

And so, they want that feeling of dragging on that's why they won't stipulate. They know they could expedite all of this, but they don't want to. The quicker they can get through a presentation of evidence means that you have an uninterrupted story.

Imagine you are binge watching something. The longer you take away from each episode, the more you get distracted, the more you might not be willing to go back and lean in again. If you can binge watch over the course of a weekend, you are a fan of the show. If you can't, you are going to be disjointed.

This defense wants you not to binge watch the presentation of evidence. They want it to be structured in a way that makes you want to leave, come back, and maybe the focus on his eyes being closed. But is their mind wandering when you have mundane details? The defense wants that.

COLLINS: Well -- and what about, I mean, the tape that everyone heard yesterday? You heard Michael Cohen's voice, probably the loudest, because he was the closest to this audio recording that he recorded of his conversation with Donald Trump.

[10:55:00]

But you also hear Donald Trump on that. And that is a powerful piece of evidence for this jury because it's actually the first time they've heard Trump's voice in this courtroom. He doesn't speak when he's inside the courtroom. He sits there, talks to his attorneys, so you can't -- if you're a juror, you can't hear him. And is that something that the prosecution believes will be powerful for them to have in their minds over the weekend?

REID: Well, they certainly think it's helpful to their case because they introduced it. But as one of the lawyers noted earlier, the issue is it's not -- it has nothing to do with Stormy Daniels, right? They're discussing the payment for Karen McDougal, not the Stormy Daniels payment, which is at the heart of this case.

So, I think it is notable to hear them discussing a hush money type payment. But again, it's not the one that's at the heart of this case, so that's not going to make or break. We're still waiting for that evidence to connect the defendant directly to this alleged scheme to falsify documents.

COLLINS: And we're still waiting to see who the next witness could be on the stand this afternoon in Donald Trump's hush money trial. The judge has just left the room during a brief break. The jury also out of the box. But when they come back, it will be that building block witness who is going to take the stand, the Manhattan paralegal reading thousands and thousands of Trump social -- Trump related social media posts.

You are watching CNN's special live coverage. We'll be back in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:00:00]