The unprecedented case against Donald Trump before a court in New York must clear a number of legal hurdles if it is to lead to the first criminal conviction of a former US president, legal experts said Wednesday.

Some of them considered this indictment text to be "less important" than other investigations threatening the former president, which raised doubts about its coherence.

As expected, the former president's defenders carried on the indictment issued Tuesday during Trump's unprecedented appearance in a Manhattan court.

Attorney Joe Tacopina expressed "satisfaction" upon reading the indictment, which he saw as "does not include any new material element," expecting, in an interview with NBC, that the case would "fade" quickly.

In a move that rarely happens, the opponents of the Republican billionaire expressed their dissatisfaction with the text of an accusation that could eventually serve his candidacy for the presidency in 2024.

"This document makes me sad," his former national security adviser, John Bolton, who has become a staunch critic, told CNN. "It came out even weaker than I had feared."

In the same context, the former deputy director of the Federal Police, Andrew McCabe, who was dismissed by Trump days before his retirement, said he was "disappointed" about the 34 charges brought against the former president on Tuesday related to "falsifying accounting documents."

The 45th President of the United States has been accused of manipulating his company's accounts to hide a $130,000 payment to a porn star to buy her silence before the 2016 election.

In New York State, forging accounting documents is generally considered a petty offense, but it becomes a misdemeanor punishable by up to four years in prison if it is committed to "conceal" another misdemeanor.

At a news conference, Democratic Attorney General Alvin Bragg confirmed that was the case in this case but did not go into detail about what this other offense might be, talking about possible violations of campaign finance laws or tax evasion.

"The New York judiciary, unlike the federal judiciary, allows inaccurate indictments," John Coffey, a law professor at Columbia University, told AFP.

For his part, his colleague William Banks from Syracuse University considered the accusation file "risky on several levels," pointing to the problem of the credibility of the main witness in the prosecution, Donald Trump's former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen.

This man paid actress Stormy Daniels out of his own pocket to not reveal a sexual relationship that she confirms she had with Trump in 2006.

Michael Cohen, who later received the amount from the Trump Organization, confirms today that he acted at the behest of Donald Trump. But the former president's lawyers accuse him of "pathologically lying" and state that he was convicted of tax evasion by the federal judiciary.

Richard Hasen, professor of law at the University of California, confirms on the website of Slate magazine that the prosecutions against Trump in New York are "a legal and political mistake."

This well-known expert in electoral law states that the federal judiciary failed in 2012 to convict John Edwards, the candidate for the Democratic primary in 2008, when his mistress received about half a million dollars during the campaign to hide her pregnancy.

Richard Hasen fears that a similar failure "will give credence to Trump's accusations that he has been subjected to a 'crushing campaign'."

The danger is that other investigations threatening the former real estate mogul will be discredited.

"This case is insignificant compared to other cases," says William Banks, considering that the "most threatening" investigation for him is in the state of Georgia, where a prosecutor is looking into pressure exerted by Trump on election officials after his defeat in the 2020 presidential election.

"There is a recording in which we hear him calling for votes (...), which he will find difficult to deny," the expert said.

For its part, the federal judiciary is investigating its role in the attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021, and its management of the White House archives.

On the other hand, former prosecutor Barbara McQuaid considered, unlike other experts, that the New York file is “solid” because it is “primarily based on documents,” especially checks signed by Trump to return the amount paid to Michael Cohen.

"Unlike witnesses, documents do not lie and are not forgotten," she added.
And if the case reaches a jury in 2024, Trump will face a major handicap represented by his weak popularity in Manhattan, the stronghold of the Democrats. Aware of this danger, he had previously requested that the trial be moved to Staten Island, a more conservative area.