Trump trial: 1st week of testimony ends with testimony from Michael Cohen's former banker
Banker Gary Farro testified in Donald Trump's hush money trial in New York.
Former President Donald Trump is on trial in New York City, where he is facing felony charges related to a 2016 hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. It marks the first time in history that a former U.S. president has been tried on criminal charges.
Trump last April pleaded not guilty to a 34-count indictment charging him with falsifying business records to hide the reimbursement of a hush money payment his then-attorney Michael Cohen made to Daniels in order to boost his electoral prospects in the 2016 presidential election.
Top headlines:
- Banker says he set up LLC, which Cohen used to pay Daniels
- 'Thank you for handling' McDougal, Pecker says Trump told him
- 'This story is true,' Pecker recounts being told of Stormy Daniels
- Pecker describes $150,000 negotiations for McDougal's story
- Secret Service has plans if Trump is confined for contempt: Sources
What to know about the hush money case
READ MORE: Here's what you need to know about the historic case.
Prospective juror born in Italy is excused
A prospective juror was promptly excused after he explained he was born and raised in Italy, where he said the media has a "strong association" between Donald Trump and scandal-plagued former Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi that would prevent him from being fair.
"Now that I'm sitting here, it's going to be hard for me to retain my impartiality and fairness," the man said before he was excused.
Court subsequently recessed for lunch, with the questioning of potential jurors scheduled to resume after the break.
Long Island native answers attorneys' questions
After losing two jurors, the selection process is stretching on this afternoon with prospective jurors standing up one-by-one to read the questionnaire.
"This is so bizarre," said a Long Island native when time came for her turn.
The woman is married with two children and has served on a jury three times before. She said her son is some sort of rating analyst, but conceded, "I don't actually know what he does."
Defense attorney Todd Blanche appeared to laugh at that answer. Donald Trump did not.
In response to the question of whether she can put aside bias, the prospective juror answered, "Yes, I will be unbiased. I will be very impartial."
Trump has appeared at times interested in some of the jurors as they work through their questionnaires. As one woman read her answers out loud, Trump turned his body to face her, slid is arm over the back of his chair, and crossed one leg over the other, listening.
2nd juror excused, leaving 5 seated for now
Judge Juan Merchan has excused Juror No. 4 after he returned to the courtroom to speak with the judge.
There are now five jurors seated, after Juror No. 2 was excused earlier.
Judge Merchan said the man "expressed annoyance" at how much personal information about him had been publicized.
Trump looked on from his seat, alone, as the attorneys spoke to the judge.
The judge said the sidebar discussion would be sealed and omitted from the daily transcript.
Judge, attorneys question Juror No. 4
Juror No. 4, who the DA's office said apparently failed to disclose prior encounters with the judicial system when he was picked for the jury, returned to the courtroom where he was questioned by Judge Merchan and attorneys for the two sides.
The discussion took place at the bench, out of earshot, in a private sidebar. Trump remained seated.
Assistant District Attorney Josh Steinglass questioned the juror, a grandfather originally from Puerto Rico who earlier indicated he found Trump "fascinating."
At one point, the juror broke out laughing. Defense attorney Todd Blanche also appeared to be laughing.
The man was then escorted from the courtroom, after which the judge said he would give the attorneys a few minutes to discuss the circumstances with the juror, who prosecutors determined had ripped down political posters in Westchester County in the 1990s. The posters leaned to the "political right," Steinglass had said.
There was also a prior deferred prosecution agreement the juror's wife entered into with the Manhattan district attorney's office, which he also failed to disclose while responding to the jury questionnaire.
Pecker reiterates that he didn't want Stormy Daniels' story
Former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker testified on cross-examination that the publication's limited involvement in Stormy Daniels' hush money payment was unrelated to the August 2015 Trump Tower meeting where Pecker vowed to serve as the "eyes and ears" of Trump's presidential campaign.
Pecker's testimony on cross-examination about the Daniels story appeared consistent with his testimony yesterday about his strong desire not to be involved in the Stormy Daniels payment.
Pecker said yesterday that he did not want to be involved in the story due to concerns about reputational harm to the National Enquirer and a lack of reimbursement for the other payments he had made to suppress previous Trump stories.
"I said, we already paid $30,000 to the doorman, we paid $150,000 to Karen McDougal, and I am not a bank. I am not paying out any further disbursements among us," Pecker testified yesterday. Pecker said he instructed National Enquirer Chief Content Officer Dylan Howard to flag the Stormy Daniels story to Michael Cohen, who made the payment to Daniels himself.
Asked about Daniels' payment on cross-examination, Pecker said that the National Enquirer's limited involvement was unrelated to their vow to Trump.
"You did not consider the Stormy Daniels story to be part of any agreement you had in August 2015?" defense attorney Emil Bove asked.
"That is correct," Pecker said.
"You wanted nothing to do with it?" Bove said.
"That's correct," Pecker said.
Pecker added that he did not "authorize" Howard to continue communicating with Stormy Daniels' lawyer Keith Davidson about the payment.
When Howard raised concerns to Pecker that Davidson had not yet been paid by Michael Cohen, Pecker said he was angry that Howard continued to communicate with Davidson about the story. In addition to the nature of the story -- which Pecker said could endanger the National Enquirer's relationship with its distributors -- Pecker said Cohen's delay in paying Daniels' lawyer could result in reputational harm to the National Enquirer.
"Frankly, you were not happy to be hearing that?" Bove asked about Cohen's delayed payment.
"Yes," Pecker said.
"The main concern was Howard's reputation?" Bove asked.
"Yes," Pecker said.