Fort Pierce, Florida – U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon showed skepticism on Friday regarding the arguments made by attorneys representing the co-defendants of Donald Trump in a case involving classified documents. The co-defendants, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, who are still employed by Trump, sought to have the charges against them dismissed. However, Judge Cannon indicated that their arguments might be more appropriate as a defense during trial.
During the hearing, prosecutors argued that the information provided in the indictment was sufficient, and they were not required to disclose all the evidence at that stage in the proceedings. Judge Cannon seemed to concur, suggesting that these arguments could be presented in front of a jury instead of being used to dismiss the case prematurely.
Despite grappling with the defense attorneys’ multiple requests, Judge Cannon asked pointed questions about precedent and evidence, indicating that she could have made a ruling based solely on the written arguments. The judge, potentially swayed by the arguments, did not give a timeline for her ruling.
Trump’s co-defendants’ cases took center stage during the hearing, shedding light on their potential defenses. The defense argued that Nauta and De Oliveira were simply performing their duties when they moved boxes and discussed security footage, claiming they were unaware of the federal investigation in progress.
Prosecutors alleged that Nauta and De Oliveira conspired with Trump to obstruct the investigation and impede officials’ attempts to retrieve government materials taken by Trump after leaving the White House. They accused the men of misleading investigators and plotting to delete security footage to prevent the recovery of the boxes.
Nauta is facing charges related to moving boxes from a storage room in Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s Florida property, to his residential quarters as investigators searched for them. Nauta and De Oliveira have pleaded not guilty to the charges brought against them.
The case also involves Trump, who faces multiple charges, including accusations of violating the Espionage Act. Nauta and De Oliveira are not charged in connection to the retention of sensitive government documents. The hearing focused on motions to dismiss the case filed by Nauta and De Oliveira, challenging the evidence presented in the indictment.
Both sides presented contrasting arguments during the hearing, with defense attorneys asserting the lack of knowledge about the classified materials, while prosecutors emphasized the need to prove awareness of an investigation rather than the specifics of it. The judge has yet to issue a ruling, leaving the case’s future uncertain as it navigates through pretrial proceedings.