Yesterday I left off around the time the trial had taken a break for lunch. After that there was testimony from the Delaware police officer who found the gun after Hallie Biden threw it in the trash outside a local grocery store.

Delaware State Police Lt. Millard Greer later testified about the series of events that led to the recovery of Biden’s gun, after Hallie Biden reported it missing.

Through security footage and interviews, investigators learned that an elderly man who liked to rummage around trash bins for recyclables may have taken the gun out of the trashcan that Hallie Biden had dropped it in. Greer said he surveilled the man at a Fidelity Investments storefront in the area, before approaching him later.

The man, Thomas Banner, acknowledged that he found something very important in the trash. They went back to his home to retrieve the gun, but Banner was locked out of his house and started “panicking,” Greer said.

Once they got inside, Banner gave Greer the gun and another gun he said he'd been holding onto for years. Banner also took the stand at the end of the day. Also yesterday, President Joe Biden was asked if he would pardon Hunter if he were convicted and the president said he would not.

And that brings us to day five of the trial when the prosecution rested its case after presenting two more witnesses. First up was forensic chemist Dr. Jason Brewer.

After Judge Noreika qualified Brewer as an expert witness, prosecutor Leo Wise handed him the brown leather pouch and asked him to confirm it was the one he had previously examined.

“I found a minimal amount of white powder” in and on the pouch, he testified.

On cross-examination, the defense pointed out that the bad wasn't tested until 2023, years after it was collected. Brewer admitted there was no way to determine when the cocaine residue wound up in the bag.

Next up was DEA agent Joshua Romig who testifed about common drug references found in some of Hunter's text messages.

Prosecutor Derek Hines had DEA agent Romig read through Hunter Biden's messages that have been previously introduced as evidence to testify about coded language used during drug deals. 

When he texted about “baby powder” he was using a “rudimentary, pretty standard cocaine code,” said Romig.

There was a brief cross-examination by Biden's attorney Abbe Lowell after which the prosecution rested its case. The defense immediately moved for acquittal on several grounds which is apparently standard operating procedure in many criminal cases. 

The judge didn't rule on any of their requests immediately so the defense called its first witness, Jason Turner, an employee at the store where Hunter bought the gun. Turner was subpoenaed to appear and was clearly irritated with Abbe Lowell's questions.

Lowell then drilled down on a 16-minute gap between the time that Hunter Biden's background check was completed and when the final sale was processed (time codes on the background check return and timecode on the sale receipt)...

As Lowell continued to ask Turner to walk through the timeline of the sale, Turner grew frustrated at the repetitive questions and burst out: 

“I put on my ritual robes and went and sat in a marble room," Turner said.

There are apparently two problems with the form. One is that it doesn't indicated what the 2nd form of ID Hunter provided was in addition to his passport. A 2nd form of ID was required because a passport doesn't have an address on it. Turner testified that the 2nd form of ID was a car registration but that wasn't written on the form. Also, the gun shop apparently altered the form several years later when they noticed it was deficient but the judge in this case has told the defense they can't bring that up. Lowell has been doing his best to get someone else to mention it but so far it seems that hasn't worked.

Next up was gun store owner Ron Palimere. Palimere testified he never interacted with Hunter Biden but both Turner and Gordon Cleveland (who testified yesterday) asked him if it was okay to use Biden's passport as a form of ID. Palimere said he was in and out of the store and agreed so as not to hold up the sale.

Next up, the defense called Hunter's daughter Naomi Biden to the stand. She testified about a trip to visit her dad in California in the summer of 2018 while he was in rehab.

She met her dad at a coffee shop and they had lunch where they met his sober coach. Hunter Biden's lawyer Abbe Lowell asked for the name of the rehab facility. She couldn’t immediately recall, prompting Lowell to ask if it was called The View...

Hunter Biden could be seen wiping away tears as his daughter testified, the most emotion he's shown publicly throughout this trial. 

She then testified about another meeting with her dad in October 2018 so they could exchange cars.

Naomi Biden testified that her dad seemed “hopeful” when she saw him in New York in October 2018, the month he bought the gun. After their visit they switched cars — Hunter Biden taking his truck back and his daughter keeping Joe Biden’s Cadillac. She testified that at the time she borrowed the truck, the interior was in good condition and wasn’t messy.

Lowell asked if there was any drug paraphernalia strewn about the Cadillac when she used it. “No,” she said.

Later on cross examination, she was asked if she had ever placed any drug paraphernalia in the car or ever used drugs. She said no to both questions. This is important because it closes an out for Hunter. Naomi's mother already testified that she cleaned out the car multiple times in 2018 when she knew her kids would be driving it. And on several occasions she said she found drug paraphernalia in it. So there's already a good explanation for why there was nothing in the car when she drove it. And if Naomi didn't put it there that only leaves Hunter.

Also on cross examination, Naomi testified she never saw her father smoke crack but she did admit she knew he was struggling with addiction that year.

She explained that in the broader time period that included that year, she understood that he was struggling with addiction...

Asked if she would recognize whether he was using or not, she said, “I don’t know."

Beyond this, the details of the car swap in New York were also pretty sketchy. Hunter texter Naomi around midnight to ask if they could swap the cars. She responded at 2am saying she'd fallen asleep:

Hunter Biden then responded, asking if her now-husband, Peter, could bring the truck to 57th and 5th Ave. to swap cars...

After Hunter Biden's 2 a.m. text asking for the truck, Naomi Biden replied “right now?” he didn’t respond after that, Wise said.

The next day, Oct. 18, Naomi texted Hunter to ask if she would see him before he left town.

“I’m sorry I’ve been so unreachable, it’s not fair to you,” Hunter replied, according to Wise. 

Asked if she knew why he was so unreachable, she said no.

The prosecutor asked if Hunter said anything about meeting up with Frankie or giving Frankie his ATM code. Naomi said no. Frankie is the name of a drug dealer that Hunter frequented according to his ex-girlfriend Zoe Kestan. There's a bit of color commentary from NBC News about the mood after Naomi's testimony.

Normally, when the court goes to break, there are big hugs, fist bumps, high fives and laughter among the Biden family and supporters as they stand up and leave the courtroom. Following Naomi Biden's testimony, this was the first time they didn't do that. Everyone was seemingly silent, many with their arms crossed, and walked out with serious faces.

Maybe they understand that the defense case isn't really doing much for them. James Biden, Hunter's uncle, was on hand and was expected to testify after the lunch break but after that break the defense announced they would not be calling him or anyone else.

The defense attorneys said they have not decided if Hunter Biden will testify, and they have until Monday to make that decision.

And that's it for week one of the trial. It's moving really quickly, especially when you consider that day one was spent selecting a jury. In four days we've had the entire prosecution case and nearly all of the defense case. It seemed unlikely to me that Hunter would testify because he would get grilled on cross examination but maybe they realize sending Hunter out to charm the jury is their only shot at an acquittal. 

If Hunter does testify, the prosecution could also offer rebuttal witnesses which might take another day. If Hunter does not testify then we should get closing arguments Monday followed by jury instructions.

Politico Magazine has a story up today admitting this looks like a solid case for the prosecution but also suggesting the origins of the case are suspect.

Unless something very surprising happens, the jury is likely to convict Biden in a matter of days...

Biden’s defense has little to work with after the presiding judge rejected a variety of long-shot defenses in the run-up to the trial. They have essentially been left with one key argument: that Biden did not “knowingly” make any misrepresentations when purchasing the gun because he may have thought he was clean at the time. But on its face, it is not a compelling argument...

it is far from clear that the conviction of Biden — to say nothing of a potential prison sentence — would serve any meaningful purpose.

Biden’s attorneys have pointed the jury in this direction as well. They have cited the relatively brief period of time that Biden possessed the gun (11 days) and the fact that he never used it before someone else disposed of it. The suggestion — that this was arguably a victimless crime — is hard to miss.

I don't think it serves any meaningful purpose either but then I still don't see the meaningful purpose in convicting Trump of escalating property values when all of the banks involved in the deal got their money back. That was also a victimless crime as well and yet, Trump is out $350 million as a result which is a much steeper price than Hunter is likely to pay for his paperwork crime. 

The outcome in the Stormy Daniels case seems even less defensible. 34 felonies over false business record entries? No one else has ever been charged with a crime like this so far as we know. This was made to order for one defendant. For the record, I don't even think Trump is necessarily innocent but I can still see when someone is getting railroaded by a progressive prosecutor who campaigned on taking on Trump.

All that to say, it's a little late to whine about a prosecution serving no meaningful purpose. We crossed that bridge a while ago.