During the trial, prosecutor Joshua Steinglass emphasized that the alleged sexual encounter between Stormy Daniels and Donald Trump played a significant role in Trump's efforts to keep the story under wraps in 2016. Steinglass argued that the details of the encounter were crucial for the jury to assess Daniels' credibility accurately.
According to Steinglass, Trump's attorney, Susan Necheles, was accused of selectively highlighting certain details while disregarding the consistency in Daniels' statements. This selective approach, referred to as 'cherry-picking,' aimed to undermine Daniels' credibility by focusing on perceived inconsistencies.
Steinglass's assertion underscores the importance of providing the jury with a comprehensive understanding of the alleged sexual encounter to enable them to make an informed judgment. By presenting the full scope of details, Steinglass aimed to counter Necheles' strategy of highlighting inconsistencies to cast doubt on Daniels' credibility.
The prosecutor's argument sheds light on the complex dynamics at play in the trial, where the interpretation of details and the credibility of witnesses are central to the case. By emphasizing the significance of the details surrounding the alleged encounter, Steinglass sought to ensure that the jury had the necessary tools to evaluate the case objectively.
