Judge bars Trump from delivering closing argument in NY civil business fraud trial
Judge Denies Trump’s Request to Speak in Closing Arguments of Fraud Trial
Former President Donald Trump will not be allowed to make his own closing argument in his New York civil business fraud trial, according to Judge Arthur Engoron. Trump’s lawyers had requested that he be given the opportunity to speak during the closing arguments, but Engoron imposed limits on the topics Trump could address. When Trump’s team failed to respond to the judge’s conditions, Engoron made it clear that Trump would not be speaking in court.
Engoron’s decision came after Trump’s attorney, Chris Kise, objected to the judge’s restrictions on the former president’s speech. Kise argued that Trump should be able to address all relevant matters, but Engoron stood firm in his position. The back-and-forth between the judge and Trump’s lawyer escalated, with Engoron giving a final deadline for a response.
NEW: Judge Engoron says Donald Trump can’t deliver closing statements at his NYC fraud trial tomorrow. pic.twitter.com/IUziOwS5Hj
— Erik Uebelacker (@Uebey) January 10, 2024
Trump’s civil business fraud trial stems from a lawsuit filed by New York Attorney General Letitia James. The suit alleges that Trump and his children, Donald Jr., Eric, and Ivanka, misrepresented the value of their company’s assets in financial statements. Initially seeking $250 million in fines, James is now asking the judge to impose a fine of over $370 million.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP
Judge Engoron has faced criticism from Trump in the past, with the former president calling him a “deranged, Trump-hating judge.” Engoron’s political contributions to Democrats have also raised concerns about his impartiality. As the trial continues, the judge is expected to reach a verdict by the end of the month.
How does the denial of Trump’s request to address the court directly in this civil trial spark a debate over the boundaries of a defendant’s right to speak and present their case to the jury
The decision to deny Trump’s request.
The civil fraud trial, which has been ongoing since February, centers around allegations that the Trump Organization inflated the value of its assets to obtain favorable loans and tax benefits. The lawsuit was filed by the New York Attorney General’s office and the Manhattan District Attorney’s office.
Throughout the trial, Trump’s legal team has vigorously defended him, arguing that the allegations are politically motivated and lack factual basis. They have portrayed Trump as a successful business mogul who was targeted by prosecutors for his political beliefs.
However, Judge Engoron has repeatedly reminded both sides that this is a civil trial, and political motivations should not impact the proceedings. He has emphasized the need for the trial to focus solely on the facts and evidence presented.
In denying Trump’s request, Engoron cited concerns over potential prejudice and confusion that Trump’s closing argument might introduce. He stated that allowing Trump to speak without limitations could potentially sway the jury and undermine the integrity of the trial process.
Engoron’s decision has sparked a renewed debate over the boundaries of a defendant’s right to address the court directly in civil trials. Some legal experts argue that defendants should have the opportunity to present their case directly to the jury, as long as it does not deviate from the issues at hand. Others contend that judges should exercise discretion to ensure a fair and impartial trial.
Trump’s legal team has expressed disappointment with Engoron’s ruling. They believe that their client should have the chance to address the jury directly and defend himself against the allegations leveled against him. They may consider appealing the decision or finding alternative ways to assert their position.
As the trial nears its conclusion, both sides will have the opportunity to deliver their closing arguments. However, without Trump’s direct input, his lawyers will have to skillfully present their case and persuade the jury on his behalf.
The outcome of this trial could have significant consequences for Trump and his business empire. If found liable for fraud, he could face substantial financial penalties and damage to his reputation. On the other hand, a favorable verdict could strengthen his position and undermine the credibility of his detractors.
The trial marks another chapter in Trump’s legal battles, which have spanned his presidency and continued after his departure from the White House. It serves as a reminder of the complex legal challenges that await former presidents and the scrutiny that comes with holding the highest office in the land.
In the coming days, the closing arguments will provide the final opportunity for both sides to present their case and sway the jury. Ultimately, it will be up to the judicial system to determine the truth behind the allegations and decide the fate of Donald Trump’s civil fraud trial.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
