Trump Lawyer Claims NY Judge Was ‘Definitely Assisting' Anti-Trump Lawyers

By Robert Cunningham, updated on November 8, 2023

Tensions flared in a New York courtroom as former President Donald Trump took the stand this week.

In a heated exchange, allegations of judicial bias surfaced during Trump's testimony in his civil fraud case.

The courtroom was the stage for a contentious back-and-forth on Monday, as Judge Arthur Engoron frequently interrupted Trump during his testimony. The interruptions sparked accusations of bias from Trump's legal team, a serious charge in the often-dispassionate world of law.

Allegations of Judicial Partiality

Alina Habba, an attorney for Trump, voiced her concerns following the courtroom proceedings. Habba argued that the judge was "definitely assisting" the prosecution by not allowing Trump the full opportunity to articulate his testimony. This claim of partiality casts a shadow over the trial, suggesting a prejudiced legal process against the former president.

During one particular exchange, Engoron dismissed a request from Trump's lawyer to allow the former president to present his side fully. "I'm not here to hear what he has to say. He's here to answer questions," the judge stated.

The defense insisted on the importance of hearing Trump's detailed explanations. "You have to hear what he has to say. You cannot continue to cut my client off," Trump's other attorney, Chris Kise, contested in court, reflecting a fundamental aspect of the adversarial legal system—the right to a complete testimony.

Complexities of Real Estate and Finance

Further complicating the matter, the defense posited that the banks involved in the real estate deals had been repaid, negating the presence of a financial victim. Yet, the New York attorney general's office is seeking a substantial sum—$250 million—in disgorgement, indicating the seriousness of the alleged fraud.

The case has a history stretching back several years, with accusations of deceptive property valuations by Trump's company. Before the trial started in October, Engoron had issued a summary judgment against Trump, setting the stage for what has unfolded into a contentious courtroom drama. Habba said:

You put a lawyer who works for the government up against a 50-plus-year real estate tycoon, and they're going to try and grill him on the ins and outs of loan documents, banking, and real estate, and it's just not going to go well.

The Timeline of Allegations and Legal Strife

The allegations of fraud have been a cloud over Trump's business practices for years, culminating in the recent courtroom confrontations. The trial, which began in October, has been marked by legal skirmishes, with the latest being Trump's testimony on Oct. 31. These events have been followed closely by the public, eager for insights into the former president's business operations.

The following day, Nov. 1, Habba took her grievances public, accusing Judge Engoron of bias in an interview, a serious accusation that has added fuel to the already fiery legal proceedings.

Justice Engoron's decision against Trump prior to the trial's start had already set a precedent for the kind of legal hurdles Trump's team would need to overcome. The summary judgment from Engoron meant that the primary liability had already been determined, and further proceedings would be related only to questions regarding certain ancillary claims and the sanctions to be imposed.

Legal Teams Clash Over Testimony Conduct

The defense assertion that the prosecution's lawyers lacked a deep understanding of real estate intricacies, as voiced by Habba, is a significant critique of the legal process. This claim was made in a trial that has already seen its fair share of controversy and conflict.

“They just didn’t really think it through, and the judge was definitely assisting them in making their case by quieting my client," Habba further elaborated on her view of the proceedings. This sentiment resonates with concerns over whether the defendant's right to a fair trial is upheld.

The crux of the matter lies in whether the former president's testimony was unfairly curtailed, an issue that will likely continue to be debated inside and outside the courtroom.

Conclusion

  • Former President Trump testified in a civil fraud case, clashing with Judge Arthur Engoron.
  • Trump's legal team has accused the judge of bias and impeding Trump's testimony.
  • The case involves accusations of inflated property values by Trump's real estate company.
  • The defense argues the absence of a financial victim, as banks were purportedly repaid.
  • The New York attorney general seeks $250 million in disgorgement.

About Robert Cunningham

With years of experience at the forefront of political commentary, Robert Cunningham brings a blend of sharp wit and deep insight to his analysis of American principles at the Capitalism Institute.

Top Articles

The

Newsletter

Receive information on new articles posted, important topics and tips.
Join Now
We won't send you spam. 
Unsubscribe at any time.

Recent Articles

Recent Analysis

Copyright © 2024 - CapitalismInstitute.org
A Project of Connell Media.
magnifier