Prosecutor Madison Smyser factors in the direction of high-profile actual property agent brothers Tal Alexander, Alon Alexander and Oren Alexander, sitting earlier than Decide Valerie E. Caproni, throughout her opening assertion at the beginning of their federal intercourse trafficking trial in New York Metropolis, U.S., January 27, 2026, in a courtroom sketch. REUTERS/Jane Rosenberg TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY
The intercourse trafficking trial of Oren, Tal, and Alon Alexander started on Tuesday with opening statements that had been extra purposeful than forceful — and fell wanting the gravity this case calls for. If any lawyer made an affect, it was Deanna Paul, representing Tal Alexander, who introduced the cleanest authorized argument and a tone calibrated to the stakes. The remaining? Competent, however uninspiring.
The courtroom itself alerts the burden of the proceedings. U.S. District Decide Valerie Caproni of the Southern District of New York is working a good ship — environment friendly, no-nonsense, and deeply conscious of the media scrutiny surrounding the case. She’s given the legal professionals nearly no leeway and has made clear that distractions, even technological ones, received’t be tolerated: jurors had been explicitly instructed to disable push notifications on their telephones to keep away from any outdoors affect.
The jury, notably various: six males, six ladies, break up evenly between white and Black or Hispanic jurors — seems attentive. This group might be requested to weigh deeply emotional and legally complicated testimony from as many as 25 alleged victims.
Assistant U.S. Lawyer Madison Smyser opened for the prosecution with a daring — if blunt — declaration:
“This case is about three brothers who worked together to rape girls. Woman after woman. Girl after girl. Rape after rape.”
“They masqueraded as party boys when they were actual rapists,” Smyser informed the jury.
However for all of the depth of her accusations, Smyser’s supply lacked courtroom gravitas. She repeated the phrase “what the evidence will show” no less than 10 occasions — a legislation school-safe strategy, however hardly charming. Dry and methodical, she delivered what felt like a federal apply examination opening — not a persuasive story for a jury. Worse, she lumped all three defendants collectively, lacking a chance to distinguish culpability, and handed the protection a path to carve out cheap doubt.
Federal intercourse trafficking, in contrast to rape or assault, requires a displaying that one thing of worth was exchanged for a intercourse act, and that this act occurred by pressure, fraud, or coercion. Smyser asserted she would show that the ladies had been supplied worth — entry, medication, journey, standing — and that the intercourse that adopted was coerced. She has some potent messages in her arsenal: Tal referring to victims as “cheap whores,” Oren texting that “no is not an option when it comes to sex.” However emotional shock alone received’t fulfill the weather of the crime.
Oren’s lawyer, Teny Geragos, stood fully nonetheless in a black go well with and opened with restraint:
“The government just told you a monstrous story. But the truth is something far more ordinary,” she stated.
Geragos was good, centered, {and professional} — however too dry to make a powerful impression. Geragos framed her shopper as a “womanizer,” even a “playboy,” however firmly not a trafficker.
“This case did not start with a 911 call, a hospital report, or a drug screen. It started with civil suits looking for money,” the protection lawyer stated.
Her simplest second got here when she acknowledged the jury would possibly disapprove of the approach to life and vulgar messages: “Two things can be true at once — you can disapprove of their lifestyle and still find them not guilty.”
It was a crisp abstract of the protection’s broader problem: separate ethical outrage from authorized culpability.
Deanna Paul, representing Tal Alexander, gave essentially the most considerate and managed opening. She was well-paced, composed, and most significantly, she gave the jury a method to acquit with out betraying their sense of morality.
She described the jury’s activity as like “seeing an R-rated movie you never bought a ticket to.” Then she started working, calmly reminding jurors that federal intercourse trafficking is just not the identical as rape, and that being shocked or saddened by testimony isn’t sufficient to convict.
She emphasised the slender authorized requirements required: “You can believe rape or assault happened — without believing sex trafficking occurred. Those are state law charges, not federal charges.”
And Paul questioned the reliability of reminiscence and the ability of efficiency within the courtroom: “Memory does not get more reliable with time.”
Howard Srebnick, counsel for Alon Alexander, selected to not give a gap in any respect — a wise strategic selection. By deferring, he preserved flexibility and averted being tarred by the identical brush within the authorities’s broad-brush strategy. With the prosecution grouping all three defendants collectively, the silence may go to his shopper’s profit.
The trial is anticipated to final a month. The prosecution has promised an extended line of witnesses — many testifying beneath pseudonyms — and deeply private testimony. However the protection appears able to argue that no quantity of disturbing content material can overcome what’s lacking: proof of trafficking, not simply misconduct.
Opening statements are about shaping the lens by which jurors view the proof. This week, the prosecution informed a horrifying story. However the protection reminded them, maybe extra successfully, that tales aren’t convictions, and shock is just not an alternative to proof.
Cary London is a civil rights lawyer in New York Metropolis.
