Donald Trump Could Be Banned From Talking About His Prison Sentence

Donald Trump should be banned from telling a jury about the massive prison sentences he could face in the January 6 riot trial, prosecutors have filed in court.

In a motion submitted on Wednesday, chief prosecutor Jack Smith said Trump should not be allowed to elicit sympathy from the jury by discussing either the punishment he could face or the potential damage to his reputation and businesses.

Trump faces a maximum 20-year sentence on each of two counts of obstructing Congress' confirmation of President Joe Biden's election victory and 10 years for conspiracy against the right to vote and five years for defrauding the United States.

Trump was indicted on four counts of allegedly working to overturn the results of the 2020 election in the run-up to the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. It is one of four criminal cases that Trump is facing while he campaigns as frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination.

He has pleaded not guilty to these charges and ones in the other cases, denying any wrongdoing, and has repeatedly said that they form part of a political witch hunt.

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

Judge Tanya Chutkan has frozen, or stayed, the case until the Washington D.C Court of Appeals hears Trump's application for presidential immunity. However, prosecutors can file motions in anticipation of the case restarting.

A jury is due to be chosen in February 2024 and the trial is set to begin the following month.

"The consequences that the defendant may face as a result of the criminal case against him are irrelevant to guilt or innocence and may not be considered by the jury," Smith's submission states.

"These include the consequences that the defendant may face if convicted, as well as the burden of trial itself. The defendant should not be permitted to raise such issues in front of the jury," the submission states.

It says that any mention by Trump of his possible punishment "invites [jurors] to ponder matters that are not within their province, distracts them from their fact-finding responsibilities, and creates a strong possibility of confusion."

"The defendant must be prohibited from referencing in the presence of the jury, whether directly or indirectly, the penalties associated with the charged offenses, or any collateral consequences that the proceedings may cause for the defendant, his livelihood, or his other activities," it adds.

It quotes the 1974 case of U.S vs. Bell in stating that "evidence which has the effect of inspiring sympathy for the defendant or for the victim[...]is prejudicial and inadmissible when otherwise irrelevant."

Smith asked Chutkan to ban Trump from mentioning the effect the potential punishment could have on his "professional pursuits or his family, resources, or livelihood."

It also claims that "through public statements, filings, and argument in hearings before the court, the defense has attempted to inject into this case partisan political attacks and irrelevant and prejudicial issues that have no place in a jury trial."

"Although the court can recognize these efforts for what they are and disregard them, the jury—if subjected to them—may not."