How Stormy Daniels' Testimony Might Have Impacted Jury

A New York jury won't be shocked by the graphic nature of Stormy Daniels' evidence in former President Donald Trump's hush money trial, a legal expert said.

Greg Germain, a law professor at Syracuse University in New York, told Newsweek that Daniels seemed "very credible" on the witness stand.

"The fact that she says it was consensual when she could have easily claimed it was not, adds to her credibility," Germain said. "Still, it's not a crime to have an affair and deny it, or to pay hush money to keep it secret. At one time, a politician's extramarital affair was quite a scandal. Now even the religious right doesn't seem to care."

Judge Juan Merchan noted in court that some of Daniels' testimony was explicit and better off not said.

Merchan also said he was surprised that Trump's legal team didn't object to some parts of her testimony, especially when she said that Trump didn't use a condom.

However, Germain said he didn't think that the jury would be put off by Daniels' testimony.

"They are, after all, New York City jurors, not prudes from the Bible Belt," he said. "Might the jury sense that the DA was trying to manipulate them to look past the weak case on the merits and focus instead on salacious details? They must be very confused about what the case is actually about—just like the rest of us."

Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, is the first former president in United States history to stand trial in a criminal case. He has pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records. He has continually said that the case and other criminal and civil matters involving him are politically motivated.

The prosecution seeks to prove that before the 2016 presidential election, Trump paid, or discussed paying, adult film star Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal to not disclose his alleged affairs with them. He denies affairs with either woman.

Daniels completed her testimony on Thursday after sometimes-heated cross-examination by Trump attorney Susan Necheles.

Newsweek sought email comment from Trump's attorney on Friday.

"All the jury really needs to believe is that Trump and Daniels had sex and years later Trump paid Daniels off to keep her quiet, then 'cooked the books' to hide that payment, in violation of an election fraud law," David Ring, a partner in Taylor & Ring in Los Angeles, told Newsweek.

"All in all, Daniels came across as credible. You don't have to be a saint or live a perfect life to have credibility on the witness stand. Someone like Daniels, with all the blemishes and tawdry tales, can be and in fact was credible. Trump desperately wanted to land a knockout punch. He didn't come close."

Brent Baker, an attorney with the Buchalter law firm in Salt Lake City, Utah, told Newsweek that Daniels "remained strong" under intense cross-examination.

"The judge and jury are assessing her credibility as a witness continuously during her testimony, even when the subject matter was distasteful or potentially casting her in a negative light," Baker said.

"From my perspective, she didn't blanch at all. The strength of her testimony and confident demeanor can potentially create problems for former President Trump's case."