it s newsday. hello and welcome to the programme. we begin with breaking news donald trump has become the first us president in history to be charged with a crime. he ll be charged in new york over alleged hush money given to a porn starjust before the 2016 presidential election. mr trump, who s running again for president, has repeated he s innocent and called the indictment political persecution and election interference . his son eric said it was the opportunistic targeting of a political opponent in a campaign year. the bbc s nada tawfik s outside the court in new york. we can speak to her now. it is late in the evening there, as i understand it, nada, and the press have been gathering, as you have pointed out. what has been the reaction of people who have been passing you by, talking to you about this? figs talking to you about this? as ou talking to you about this? sis you said, talking to you about this? is you said, a few moments ago, the district attorney was a
donald trump has become the first us president in history to be charged with a crime. he ll be charged in new york over alleged hush money given to porn starjust before the 2016 presidential election. mr trump, who s running again for president, has repeated he s innocent, and called the indictment political persecution and election interference. his son eric said it was the opportunistic targeting of a political opponent in a campaign year. in a moment, we ll get the view from washington with our correspondent nomia iqbal. first, let s go to the court in new york. the bbc s nada tawfik is outside the court in new york. you have been there for the last few hours. what is the latest now? latest now? well, we are caettin latest now? well, we are getting a latest now? well, we are getting a better - latest now? well, we are getting a better sense i latest now? well, we are getting a better sense of| latest now? well, we are - getting a better sense of how all of this is lik
there is in exhibit a now in their case to say, there |~ , ., exhibit a now in their case to say, there |~ ,, , ,, there is in your time covering us oli it there is in your time covering us policy it is. there is in your time covering us policy it is. i there is in your time covering us policy it is, i wonder there is in your time covering us policy it is, i wonder what - there is in your time covering us policy it is, i wonder what you i there is in your time covering us. policy it is, i wonder what you and the american voter makes of policy it is, i wonder what you and the american voter makes of this. unprecedented moment in history. so much for american voters to get their heads around at this point in time. what do you think the reaction is or what s going through the minds of people sitting and watching this happen in prime time this evening? i think that almost everything in america political light get torn apart. it gets torn apart where you are either conserva
sound, as if he was defending trump. 50 sound, as if he was defending trump- - - sound, as if he was defending trump. so sorry to interrupt ou but trump. so sorry to interrupt you but unfortunately - trump. so sorry to interrupt you but unfortunately we - trump. so sorry to interrupt| you but unfortunately we have run out of time. i just want to break away from this story for a moment, to bring you another update we ve had in from the us, where a jury has found the oscar winning actor gwyneth paltrow was not responsible for the injuries sustained by a man during a ski slope collision in 2016. the star was being sued over the incident in utah, but the jury ruled that it was in fact the claimant a retired optometrist, terry sanderson who was at fault. was gwyneth paltrow at fault? no. was gwyneth paltrow s fault a cause of terry sanderson s harm? oh, no. skip that. there sjust no response there. 0k. was terry sanderson at fault? yes. was terry sanderson s fault a cause gwyneth paltr
a cause of terri sanderson s harm? r , , a cause of terri sanderson s harm? w , , ., harm? oh, skip it. there is no resnonse harm? oh, skip it. there is no response there. harm? oh, skip it. there is no response there. harm? oh, skip it. there is no response there. terry. - harm? oh, skip it. there is noj response there. terry. was terry sanderson response there. terry. was terry sanderson at response there. terry. was terry sanderson at fault? - response there. terry. wasj terry sanderson at fault? yes. was terry sanderson s fault a cause gwyneth paltrow s. did terry sanderson s fault because gwyneth paltrow s harm? yes. comparative fault. what % of the fault you assigned to terry sanderson? 100%. damages. what amount fairly compensates gwyneth paltrow for economic damages? $1. 0ur correspondent sophie long was at the court for the verdict. earlier high asked her the significance of what has happened. significance of what has happened- significance of what has