Worrying About the Judge and the Jury for Trump’s Trial

To the Editor:

Don’t do it, liberal America! Don’t get caught up in the melodrama of the Florida trial! The former president craves attention. The news media collude by granting him free publicity. Why give this despicable man what he wants?

And the trial outcome? Yes, it seems that Jack Smith has an open-and-shut case. Yet there is a reasonable likelihood that we have a shut-and-shut-down judge. This is the bad luck of the draw.

Judge Aileen M. Cannon has myriad tactics at her disposal to delay, disrupt and derail the proceedings. She can influence jury selection, undercutting chances of a unanimous guilty verdict. Even if the jury reaches that conclusion, it is the judge who sets the sentence. This could be a slap on the wrist.

Why not assume that the chances of conviction and a serious sentence are small and turn your attention to other matters of national significance?

If you must follow the legal adventures of the former president, it’s better to focus on the likely trial in Georgia and Mr. Smith’s Jan. 6 investigation.

David B. Abernethy
Portola Valley, Calif.
The writer is professor emeritus of political science at Stanford University.

To the Editor:

Re “Trial Judge Puts Documents Case on Speedy Path” (front page, June 21):

So Judge Aileen M. Cannon has set a trial date for August. I’m suspicious. She will have total power over the sentence as well as the ability to dismiss the case. Is she helping Donald Trump by getting the whole matter resolved quickly in order for it to be done before the election?

How dare she ignore calls to recuse herself, given her record? She must be removed.

Sandy Miley
Sherrill, N.Y.

To the Editor:

Re “Leaving Trump’s Fate to 12 Ordinary Citizens Is Genius,” by Deborah Pearlstein (Opinion guest essay, June 16):

In ordinary times Professor Pearlstein’s belief in the wisdom of the jury system in trying Donald Trump would be warranted, but these are not ordinary times. Mr. Trump has primed his followers to threaten and intimidate anyone who might oppose him.

No matter the strength of the case, I believe that at least some jurors will vote to acquit because they justifiably fear for their safety.

David Ligare
Carmel Valley, Calif.

To the Editor:

Central to the case against Donald Trump are the details about the highly classified documents he took. And the key problem is that the defense’s right to see the government’s evidence conflicts with the absolute need to keep that material secret.

There is then the possibility that the judge might agree to suppress such crucial evidence. Could people with the highest security clearance review the documents and present affidavits and witnesses in court supporting the government’s assertions?

This might provide a litmus test for the integrity of the judicial process.

Arnold Mitchell
Scarsdale, N.Y.

To the Editor:

Re “Judge’s Record in Trump Case Raises Concern” (front page, June 15):

While I understand that any judge presiding over an unprecedented and historic case like this will receive scrutiny, I am appalled at how easily a Latina woman is denigrated for her inexperience and for bristling when she is questioned.

Such descriptions hold no weight for this 49-year-old working mother and small-business owner. I’ve heard it all before ad nauseam.

Speaking as a liberal, I hope that Judge Aileen M. Cannon proves all of her naysayers wrong and goes down in history as an amazing jurist.

Would a male judge have had the same questions raised about him at the same stage of his career? I highly doubt it. So much of this article reads like water cooler talk about the new female boss.

Shantha Krishnamurthy Smith
San Jose, Calif.

To the Editor:

It was not the Watergate break-in that brought Richard Nixon down; it was the cover-up and obstruction of justice. Similarly, it was not the taking or storage of classified documents that resulted in Donald Trump’s indictment; it was the lying to the F.B.I. and D.O.J. and obstruction of justice.

Mike Pence and Joe Biden stored government documents, but promptly cooperated with the government and returned the documents. It’s not complicated.

Alan M. Goldberg
Brooklyn

To the Editor:

I already know how I would vote if I were on the jury of the Trump trial.

Good luck finding 12 Americans who don’t.

Eliot Riskin
Riverside, Conn.

The Revolt in Russia

To the Editor:

Re “How Revolt Undermines Putin’s Grip” (news analysis, front page, June 26):

An autocrat must always appear strong. An act of treason and rebellion was committed against Russia, and Vladimir Putin blinked. His mentor Stalin is turning over in his grave.

A severe crack has now developed in Mr. Putin’s power structure that he may not have enough cement to repair.

Ed Houlihan
Ridgewood, N.J.

To the Editor:

What kind of world have we come to when we’re rooting for the mercenaries?

Elliot Shoenman
Los Angeles

Migrants and New York’s Suburbs

To the Editor:

“New York City and Suburbs: A Rift Widens” (front page, June 18) highlighted the opposition of Ed Day, the Rockland County executive, to migrants being housed in hotels in the suburbs.

Although some suburban residents oppose migrants coming to our communities, there are others who want to give migrants a chance to have a better life. I have met many Westchester residents who want to donate food and clothing to migrants.

And — if the federal government would make it easier for the migrants to work legally — we could try matching employers who can’t find employees to work in their industry with migrants who would like to work legally in the suburbs.

Churches and synagogues in the suburbs would welcome the opportunity to have congregants “adopt” individual migrants and to provide them with personal attention and help so they could live a better life.

Ed Day does not speak for the suburbs.

Paul Feiner
Greenburgh, N.Y.
The writer is the Greenburgh town supervisor.

Climate Education: New Jersey’s Example

To the Editor:

Re “Schools Encourage 7-Year-Olds to Fix Climate Change, Not Fear It” (front page, June 17):

Three cheers to my former home state, New Jersey, for having the guts and the smarts to take on climate change in its education system. The effects of our climate’s unsettling behavior will continue to be felt by all, whether you agree that it’s happening or deny it.

The youngest of us will experience its effects longer than my generation of grandparents, so of course it is totally logical to begin with them in their early education years.

The great purpose of education is to prepare all ages to live meaningfully in the world as it is and as it changes. Surely, teaching the young how to bend with the arc of change and sway with its seasons could not be more relevant today.

I wish New Jerseyans well with this, but even more I wish them insight into what they are doing so they can become ambassadors to the other states and, yes, the federal Department of Education as well.

Well done, New Jersey!

Bill Hoadley
Santa Fe, N.M.