No. Trump paid his lawyer for working with another attorney to establish an NDA. He classified them as legal fees. What was he supposed to classify them as?
And the defense assumed that Merchan was going to use “election interference” so they wanted the FEC commissioner at the time, who reviewed the payments and determined it didn’t qualify as election interference, a chance to explain to the jury why they made that determination.
The defense didn’t know how big of a deal not letting him testify was until the final moment when Merchan FINALLY listed the 3 categories of predicate crimes.
So in the Bragg case the expert was 100% related to the predicate crime. Merchan knew his testimony would have taken one of the 3 categories off the board. He couldn’t allow that.
Here, the psychologist might help soften intent but it’s not a matter of intent, it’s a matter of “was he using drugs when he checked “no” on the form”. But again, the judge felt the defense was inadequate in what was provided the defense in discovery, Neither of us have that info.
And the character of the gun shop owners has no bearing on what Hunter put on the forms. How does it even related to the crime in question?