Stormy Daniels' 'Lurid' Testimony Backfires on Trump Case, Experts Claim

Pundits and legal analysts criticized Stormy Daniels' testimony in the Donald Trump hush money case, suggesting her graphic descriptions and open dislike of Trump may have hurt the prosecution's case.

Stormy Daniels' testimony against former President Donald Trump in the hush money case has received unfavorable reactions from experts, who believe her explicit answers and evident animosity towards Trump may have undermined her credibility.

Daniels, a vocal Trump critic, provided a detailed account of an alleged sexual encounter with Trump in Lake Tahoe in 2006. However, her testimony has been met with skepticism and criticism.

CNN legal analyst Elliot Williams suggested that Daniels' testimony could "backfire" on the prosecution, arguing that her unsolicited and extensive details may aid the defense's closing statements. CNN justice correspondent Evan Perez agreed, stating that Daniels' "couldn't stop saying stuff" could damage the case.

CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig found Daniels' responses during cross-examination "disastrous," particularly her admission to hating Trump. Honig emphasized that a witness's personal dislike for the defendant raises significant credibility issues.

"The View" co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin, a former Trump aide and now a critic, questioned Daniels' credibility. While acknowledging Daniels' story as believable, Griffin expressed concern that her graphic details may have diminished her credibility.

MSNBC legal analyst Danny Cevallos described Daniels as a "risky witness" who "adds her editorial" to answers. He suggested that her testimony unnecessarily turned the trial into a "quasi-sex assault case," opening avenues for appeal for Trump's legal team.

Former federal judge Shira Scheindlin told CNN that Daniels exhibited a clear "motive to get Trump" during her testimony. She pointed to Daniels' repeated expressions of hatred towards Trump as potentially influencing the jury's perceptions.

Other commentators also criticized Daniels' testimony for being overly detailed and irrelevant to the case. Former U.S. Attorney Joseph DiGenova argued that Daniels' testimony "wasn't effective" and "didn't help the prosecution."

Trump is accused of falsifying business documents related to the alleged hush money payment to Daniels. Daniels has not alleged that Trump forced himself on her but has described a power imbalance during their encounter.

Trump has pleaded not guilty to the charges. The case has attracted significant media attention due to the involvement of Trump and Daniels, who has been a vocal critic of the former president.