Trump lawyers say Stormy Daniels refused subpoena outside a Brooklyn bar, papers left 'at her feet'

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: AP

Updated 9:58 PM EDT, April 17, 2024


NEW YORK (AP) — Donald Trump’s legal team says it tried serving Stormy Daniels a subpoena as she arrived for an event at a bar in Brooklyn last month, but the porn actor, who is expected to be a witness at the former president’s criminal trial, refused to take it and walked away.

A process server working for Trump’s lawyers said he approached Daniels with papers demanding information related to a documentary recently released about her life and involvement with Trump, but was forced to “leave them at her feet,” according to a court filing made public Wednesday.

“I stated she was served as I identified her and explained to her what the documents were,” process server Dominic DellaPorte wrote. “She did not acknowledge me and kept walking inside the venue, and she had no expression on her face.” The encounter, prior to a screening of the “Stormy” film at the 3 Dollar Bill nightclub, has touched off a monthlong battle between Trump’s lawyers and Daniels’ attorney that continued this week as the presumptive Republican nominee’s criminal trial began in Manhattan.

Trump’s lawyers are asking Judge Juan M. Merchan to force Daniels to comply with the subpoena. In their filing, they included a photo they said DellaPorte took of Daniels as she strode away. Daniels’ lawyer Clark Brewster claims they never received the paperwork. He described the requests as an “unwarranted fishing expedition” with no relevance to Trump’s criminal trial.

Read more: https://apnews.com/article/stormy-daniels-donald-trump-d3dce88566bafb714dbb5c1acd3e4a83

[no_hypocrisy]

1. She can make an argument of "incomplete service".

I'm pretty sure that the NY CPLR insists on hand delivery.

They can try the "nail-and-mail" service as an alternative.

[former9thward]

3. That argument would go nowhere.

I have not seen the video but if she physically refuses to take the subpoena she has been served. This is not TV,

[BootinUp]

7. Assuming a judge with the utmost in integrity. nt

[SunSeeker]

17. Wrong. She did not "physically refuse service." It appears she did not even notice the douchebag.

The process server Dellaporte basically admitted that:

 “She did not acknowledge me and kept walking inside the venue, and she had no expression on her face.”

Then the dumbshit Dellaporte throws the papers on the ground "at her feet" as she's walking away. In a crowd. In front of a bar. At a movie premiere. No, that is not good service.

And there is no video. The dumbshit just took a PHOTO. And all the photo shows apparently is her walking away, with the papers on the ground. Per the article: "In their filing, they included a photo they said DellaPorte took of Daniels as she strode away." Pretty suspicious of him to only include a photo and not a video. Does his phone not have a video function? That photo of her walking away does not prove service. That's why process servers stake out a person's home and catch people as they're walking out or pulling their car out, where they can't claim they didn't see them.

But even if that bullshit attempt at service is sufficient, it should go nowhere. As also noted in the article:

Earlier this month, Merchan blocked an attempt by Trump to subpoena NBC Universal for information related to the documentary. He wrote that subpoena and the demands therein “are the very definition of a fishing expedition.”

[former9thward]

21. Daniels is at the heart of the case.

Hardly a fishing expedition. I don't think court's agree on your definition of "good service".

[SunSeeker]

24. No, Trump's fraud is the heart of the case.

Stormy is but one of the raunchy adulterous escapades Trump hid from the voting public immediately before the 2016 election. A much more central witness to Trump's scheme is David Pecker, who was a major accessory to the catch and kill of the stories on Trump's lasciviousness.

I can assure you, throwing papers on the ground as someone has their back to you walking away in a crowd is not good service in any jurisdiction.

[LiberalFighter]

28. The details as you explained says it all. Process server failed.

[azureblue]

13. She can

Let's translate what Trump's lackeys say into reality, because we know Repubs lie about everything:

She was at a crowded bar and surrounded by a lot of people. The process server saw her, but could not get close to serve her, so he just dropped the service on the floor and left. The claim of eye contact is bullshit. I go to bars and make eye contact with a lot of people, but that doesn't mean I purposely ignore them.

[SunSeeker]

19. What claim of eye contact? The process server admitted she did not even acknowledge him.

By his own description, it appears she did not even see him.

As you noted, the process server saw her, but could not get close to serve her, so he just dropped the papers on the ground and left.

That is not good service.

[whathehell]

27. Who the hell drops papers on the floor

of a crowded bar and expects them to be picked up?

[LiberalFighter]

29. I could come up with some names. Considering how the J6 insurrectionists acted there are many.

[whathehell]

39. Perhaps the better question is..

Who would expect anyone to pick it up?

[MurrayDelph]

35. Isn't "incomplete service"

how Stormy described her encounter with Donald?

[The Wizard]

2. Surprise surprise

Team trump is attempting to abuse process to effect another delay. Throw his orange criminal ass in jail already. Normal people have heard enough of his bullshit.
How much did George Soros pay Trump to undermine the GQP?

[Traurigkeit]

4. Like that last line ... Those in Nebraska white sheets would go crazy if true

[The Wizard]

42. Shout it from the rooftops

It makes the cult nervous. Share with everyone. Let's plant land mines in their unconscious minds.

[2naSalit]

5. More performance "art"...

If you can call that art.

Mob activity on a daily basis, lock the fucker up FFS!

[Raven123]

6. And this is coming out now? Why not when it happened?

[Prairie Gates]

11. Because they expected delays due to motions pre jury selection, and then further delays

during jury selection.

But the jury selection is going smoothly, with seven already selected and a good chance that the full jury will be seated today or tomorrow. So this is yet another attempt to delay proceedings. They are absolutely deathly afraid of getting to opening statements and witnesses. The other benefit for them here is to try to disqualify Daniels as a witness (which they have already failed at in multiple motions), because even after all this time, Daniels testifying to their affair under oath in open court is one of the things Trump most wants to avoid.

[LiberalFighter]

30. Very good point.

[riversedge]

8. ...Trump's lawyers are asking Judge Juan M. Merchan to force Daniels to comply with the subpoena.

...........Trump’s lawyers are asking Judge Juan M. Merchan to force Daniels to comply with the subpoena. In their filing, they included a photo they said DellaPorte took of Daniels as she strode away.

Daniels’ lawyer Clark Brewster claims they never received the paperwork. He described the requests as an “unwarranted fishing expedition” with no relevance to Trump’s criminal trial.

[Prairie Gates]

9. As jury selection proceeds unfettered, they come up with other delay tactics

Desperation setting in.

Opening statements soon, Donny...

[getagrip_already]

10. This judge has likely had it with tsf waiting till beyond the last minute to raise these issues...

The trial has started. It is beyond late to subpoenaing documents, or raising issues over a month old.

I don't think he is going to be accommodating.

[Ford_Prefect]

12. If the issue were valid couldn't they deliver the papers to her lawyer? We've seen that they do not play by the rules

so how can this be a legitimate process?

[FakeNoose]

14. Why serve her with a subpoena? What's the purpose, other than to intimidate her?

Stormy Daniels didn't break any laws, Chump did. Besides that, she probably misunderstood the situation, as any law-abiding citizen would have. She's a private citizen and she was unaccompanied by a lawyer, so she didn't know what to do.

[Smackdown2019]

15. Who says the photo was from their server?

1. That photo could from anyone.
2. Dropped at her feet is not serving. They must ask if they are who they are to be served and then present the subpoena.
3. Was there mutiple people there during alleged serving? If so, she may not know their presents as if any other fan, thus was not a proper service.
4. H-hour and we are now hearing about this?

[machoneman]

16. Another delay tactic, one that should fail. Why bring it up so, so late?

[area51]

18. Why should nazi party members be upset if a subpoena is ignored?

After all, it's what Gym Jordan does.

[4lbs]

20. With regards to him and Stormy, it is likely another case of "premature" something...

Along the lines of Two Pump .... rhymes with Chump.

[Mawspam2]

22. Just like Trump to use a cut-rate, unprofessional process server to save a buck that he didn't even pay for.

So on target for him.

[Joinfortmill]

23. I don't know, folks, from what the NY rules say, it looks like she was served...

if they followed through with the filings required after they physically served her. There are lots of sites out there, mostly attorneys, who explain the process, if you're interested in looking into this further.

[NanaCat]

25. No, it doesn't

He talks about eye contact in a crowded scenario rather than getting her attention by approaching her, and then throwing the subpoena 'at her feet'. When she was surrounded by people in a crowded bar. No indication she was even facing him when he threw the subpoena on the ground--a very stupid thing to do in a crowded area.

That is not proper serving process.

[LiberalFighter]

33. If we are interested there are sites

But you don't provide info from them.

[Joinfortmill]

36. No. The rules can get complicated and there are lots of links. I just voiced my opinion based on what I read.

[Think. Again.]

26. There are very clear instructions...

...on what is considered properly served or not.

[Clash City Rocker]

31. So ignoring a subpoena is wrong, except when Trump does it?

I assume this is another Republican “accuse someone else of what you’re doing” PR tactic.

I’m curious as to why they would want her to testify. So now he wants to be associated with porn stars?

[BumRushDaShow]

32. "I'm curious as to why they would want her to testify."

It's for this -

[appleannie1]

34. Me too. The trial is not about her. She was not there when he falsified business records.

They just want to smear her even more than she has already been smeared. She did not blackmail him. He willingly gave her money to keep quiet and the trial isn't even about that. It is what he did after she was no longer even in the picture.

[BumRushDaShow]

37. I had merely quoted the person I replied to

And based on earlier articles I saw, I expect I know what the harassing subpoenas are about - her documentary (trailer posted in my response) which released last month.

The judge had already told him to stop with that and of course they always refuse to comply with a first admonishment.

[appleannie1]

38. I am waiting to see him sitting in jail without access to his phone

You can bet your bippy if one of us had done even half of what he has done the last couple months, we would be in jail for contempt. I think the court is afraid of what his goon squad would do if they put him where he belongs. I think the orange faker is banking on them making J6 look like a picnic in the park if they put him in jail so the courts are trying to avoid that.

[BumRushDaShow]

40. If you had followed the Sam Bankman-Fried FTX case and trial

THAT is exactly what eventually happened to him.

But it took 6 months worth of escalating "warnings" and restrictions (including of phone/computer use as he was out on $250 million (yes "million" ) bail and staying at his parents' house.

He still defied the admonishments, continued to contact witnesses and the press (this was happening between around late January 2023 - July 2023), and the judge finally threw his behind IN JAIL until his trial (which meant from August 2023 - October 2023 or thereabouts if I remember correctly). He was ultimately convicted and sits in prison now (still whining).

[SunSeeker]

43. It's witness intimidation, and an attempt to step on her movie premiere.

Trump is really pissed off she made that movie which reveals unflattering truths about him, and I imagine he wanted to somehow discredit her and the movie by trying to get her served at the movie's premiere.

[BumRushDaShow]

44. Exactly!

[republianmushroom]

41. Did they have the correct person, this time.