Since the payments were not official acts, they can consider the motive for those acts. Now, there are also issues with using alleged federal crimes as a basis for a state conviction, but that has nothing to do with this SCOTUS decision.>>> There is Hope Hicks testimony, tweets and phone records all used as evidence. They are inadmissible.
I just don’t see how you can go back to the jury and say “forget the tweets and Hicks testimony” and get them to reconsider without nullifying the existing verdict and having another trial without those materials.
They’ve already decided but based on illegal evidence being presented.
The cake has already been baked. You have start over.
“There is Hope Hicks testimony, tweets and phone records all used as evidence. They are inadmissible.”
Correct. These are the issues that relate directly to the SCOTUS immunity decision. As I have stated before, IMHO they will need to vacate the verdict and possibly retry the case without that evidence, if they think they can still win without it.