Prosecutors slammed after presenting ‘chicken scratch’ notes as evidence in Trump hush money trial

NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK: In a courtroom session on Monday, May 6, prosecutors tried to unravel the intricate web of financial transactions surrounding the hush money paid to adult film actress Stormy Daniels, attempting to implicate former President Donald Trump in a case that has dominated the news cycle.

Two pivotal witnesses from the Trump Organization took the stand, shedding light on the inner workings of the company's finances. Jeff McConney, a former controller, and Deborah Tarasoff, an accounting employee, provided testimony that could prove crucial in the prosecution's case against Trump.

McConney's revelations: Tracing the payments

McConney's testimony painted a vivid picture as he guided the jury through a trove of documents, including invoices, checks, spreadsheets, and handwritten notes. He revealed how Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen, was allegedly "reimbursed" a total of $420,000 for the hush money payment to Daniels.

Interestingly, this money was purportedly sourced from Trump's revocable trust and personal account.

Key evidence included a handwritten note, described as "chicken scratch," documenting a conversation between McConney and Allen Weisselberg, then the chief financial officer of the Trump Organization. The note outlined a $420,000 payment divided into installments, with instructions to wire the money monthly from Trump's personal account.

McConney testified that Cohen had to submit detailed invoices each month to receive payment, a process that began in February 2017 and allegedly amounted to $35,000 per month. Notably, McConney admitted under cross-examination that he was unaware of the nature of Cohen's legal work for Trump.

The prosecution further bolstered its case with a bank statement bearing Weisselberg's handwriting, corroborating the $420,000 payment. Additionally, a spreadsheet illustrated how the payments flowed from Trump's revocable trust to his personal account, ultimately categorized as "legal expenses".

Tarasoff's testimony: Insights into Trump Organization practices

During Tarasoff's testimony, she provided insights into the approval process for invoices and the issuance of checks within the Trump Organization. Notably, she confirmed that checks to Cohen were sent to Washington, DC, for Trump's signature while he was serving as president, a detail that could implicate Trump directly in the transactions.

In a moment of levity, Tarasoff identified Trump's signature on the checks, noting his penchant for using a "black Sharpie." She clarified that only Trump had the authority to sign checks from the designated account.

The day concluded with Trump facing yet another legal setback as he was found in contempt of court for the tenth time, for which he was slapped with a $1,000 fine. Judge Juan Merchan threatened potential jail time if Trump continued to violate the gag order prohibiting him from discussing case witnesses.

As the prosecution signaled the imminent conclusion of its case, anticipation mounted for testimony from key witnesses such as Cohen, Daniels, and former Playboy model Karen McDougal. Their accounts could provide further clarity on Trump's alleged involvement in the hush money scheme, the Daily Mail reported.

Internet reacts to 'chicken scratch' notes as evidence

Prosecutors, however, faced quite a backlash on social media after the "chicken scratch" notes were presented as evidence.

"Where does the note say hush money?" one posted on X.

"Why would Cohen pay tax on payment to Daniels when [it] would be offset as expenses? No income no tax. Scam trial a joke," another wrote.

"How the hell is this relevant from 8 years ago? Why are they wasting tax payer’s money???" someone else wondered.

"Ok seriously I'm embarrassed for the prosecution idiots / they're done, it's over, they're just making fools of themselves now and ending their legal careers," another chimed in.

This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online.