Michael D. Cohen, the key witness in Donald J. Trump’s criminal trial, was questioned by the defense. He has described buying the silence of a porn star and his reimbursement by Mr. Trump, which is at the center of the charges.
Let’s say Trump decided to attack Stormy Daniels now that she’s done testifying, and she starts getting inundated with threats (or worse, something happens to her). What is the next witness going to think? Why would the next witness testify if they know they’re going to be the subject of one of Trump’s dog whistles right after they’re done?
The gag order needs to stay in place and in full effect until the end of the trial.
Not really.
Let’s say Trump decided to attack Stormy Daniels now that she’s done testifying, and she starts getting inundated with threats (or worse, something happens to her). What is the next witness going to think? Why would the next witness testify if they know they’re going to be the subject of one of Trump’s dog whistles right after they’re done?
The gag order needs to stay in place and in full effect until the end of the trial.
The only testimony remaining would be from the defense. Cohen’s testimony concluded the prosecution’s case.
The gag order set is still in effect. It’s just not justifiably enforceable in protection of witnesses that have completed their testimony.
IAAL, however, I don’t practice in the USA.
Although infrequent, witnesses for the prosecution can be called back if the presiding judge allows reopening of the prosecution’s case.
See in the USA: https://katzjustice.com/when-may-a-prosecutor-reopen-the-case-in-chief/
That’s why I tend to agree with Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world. The order should continue to be enforced until the end of the trial.