Posted on 10/02/2023 10:27:25 AM PDT by Miami Rebel
Former President Donald Trump has infamously attacked the judge presiding over his civil trial in New York for business fraud with regular frequency as the case has moved forward, so legal observers were surprised to learn that his legal team had declined to request a jury trial — leaving the ultimate verdict solely in that one judge’s hands.
New York Attorney General Letitia James’ lawsuit against the Trump Organization seeks penalties of $250 million and to ban Trump and his adult children from doing business in New York.
Judge Arthur Engoron already dealt a sharp blow to Trump last week, ruling in favor of James’ motion for summary judgment and finding the ex-president liable for the core claim in her lawsuit that Trump had committed fraud by massively inflating the value of his assets by billions of dollars and exaggerating his net worth in order to secure financing and close deals.
Engoron’s order also stripped the business certifications of the Trump Organization and related defendant corporate entities and directed a receiver to be put in place to “manage the dissolution” of those businesses. “Questions remain as to how the receiver would dissolve the properties; whether the ruling would impact properties outside of New York state, including Mar-a-Lago; and whether the Trumps could transfer the New York-based assets into a new company out of state,” CNN reported.
Unsurprisingly, Trump reacted to this ruling with an angry, all-caps rant on his Truth Social account blasting Engoron and James for their “politically motivated Witch Hunt” — and interestingly included among his complaints, “I am not even allowed a Jury!”
Trump again went after Engoron in his comments before the trial began on Monday morning, calling him a “rogue judge” and saying the trial was “a scam and a sham.”
Contrary to Trump’s complaint that he was “not even allowed” to have a jury, he absolutely did have the power to demand a jury trial, if only his attorneys had checked a single box on the front page of a standard New York court document.
In a civil case, the parties all have the right to request a jury; the only reason a trial would proceed without one is if both sides decline to demand one. Here, the prosecutors declined to so in their Notice for Trial, as seen in the screenshot below of a section of the first page, by checking the box next to “Trial without jury.”
Monday morning as the trial began, Engoron confirmed that he would be the finder of fact instead of a jury because “nobody asked for” a jury trial.
It’s not entirely clear why Trump’s attorneys didn’t request a jury trial. As Los Angeles Times senior legal affairs columnist Harry Litman noted, “[i]t’s incredibly easy” to do so and only requires you to “just check a box on a form.”
“Hard to believe that Trump understood his lawyers hadn’t done it when he’s been savaging the judge who is now the factfinder in his huge fraud trial,” Litman added.
As the trial began, commentators speculated whether Trump’s attorneys were engaging in some sort of strategy because they didn’t believe they would like the options they’d find in a New York City (i.e., liberal-leaning) jury pool or if they really did just forget to check the little box.
CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig told Mediaite he had heard these theories and “nobody has any way to know that,” but he did find it “interesting” that this might have been a deliberate strategy. “Wouldn’t shock me,” he added.
Honig and Caroline Polisi, a white-collar criminal defense attorney and legal analyst, both appeared on CNN Newsroom Monday morning to discuss the case.
“Another really important thing, the fact that this is not a jury trial changes everything,” Honig emphasized. “It changes everything about the public statements. It changes everything about the way you’d give your opening statement in the court. It changes everything about what witnesses you’re gonna call, how you cross-examine them, because now you’re making your case not to, in this case, six civilians, but to — not just a judge, but the judge who knows this case, he is probably the foremost expert on this case. So, that really changes the entire atmosphere here.”
CNN anchor John Berman commented on “how brief the opening statements were compared to what we are used to.”
“Yeah, the judge doesn’t have to get up to speed on anything here,” Polisi agreed, and noted how Engoron had already “looked up the receipts” as the finder of fact and ruled that there was fraud, so now the case would be focusing on “the issue of intent” on the remaining counts.
In New York, with New York juries, it is the right move by President Trump and his legal team, it will speed up the trial, and once James loses the case, allow President Trump to get back to campaigning.
Much easier to appeal a bench verdict. A jury would have convicted him anyhow.
You realize this same judge is the same person who valued Mar-a-Lago at 18 million
In a jury trial only one person needs to believe you, in this case the judge is already predisposed to ruling against Trump
Why have a jury of New Yorkers? It’s going to be fun watching those New Yorkers paying 3/4th of their paychecks to make up for the billionaires who will be flocking out of NYC as fast as they can.
I really wish Trump had moved his headquarters out of New York while he was still President .
The judge is an absolute MORON..how can anyone with a straight face, even a Trump hater look at Mar A Lago and say “Yeah look at that mega mansion its only worth 18 mil” 18 mil wont get you a nice house in Hidden Hills, CA but it can apparently get you Mar A Lago which is a freakin fortress
Probably looking to appeal swiftly whatever crazy ruling the judge makes.
so fired for incompetence then...
Plus he figures being a “martyr” helps him in the polls.
This is a civil case, not a criminal trial. I'm pretty sure there is no requirement for a unanimous ruling in a civil trial.
Waiving his right to a jury trial in New York City was almost certainly the right move.
You take the case out of the hands of a New York jury and put into the hands a clearly compromised judge, and on that basis, get it overturned on appeal.
President Trump is smart and so are his $1600.00 an hour lawyers, they know what they are doing.
Judge, jury. Won’t matter. And since this isn’t “beyond a reasonable doubt” or unanimous, wouldn’t change anything.
I think they did this because this politics. They will lose the case and there should be little doubt about that. Jury in New York or Rat Puke Judge. Losing to a “jury of your peers” makes it easier for leftist to make it look legitimate. Losing to A Rat Puke leftist judge who is a pure hack allows Trump to make the case that the judge is a hack. This is politics. The justice system has been destroyed.
“Much easier to appeal a bench verdict.”
Untrue, I think.
There is no difference in the grounds for appealing either a jury or non-jury verdict. In either case an appeals court must find a flaw in the application of the law. Matters of fact-finding in the trial wouldn’t be reviewable.
“beyond a reasonable doubt”
It is a civil fraud trial, the standard is preponderous of evidence.
Interesting to me is how does one get charged when no one lost money?? Also, when one files estimates cited as same, the due diligence is on the lenders.
The "Back to the Future" professor judge in this case has already opened that door with his ludicrous statement about the value of Mar-A-Lago.
This.
“You take the case out of the hands of a New York jury and put into the hands a clearly compromised judge, and on that basis, get it overturned on appeal.
“President Trump is smart and so are his $1600.00 an hour lawyers, they know what they are doing.”
President Trump has repeatedly hired terrible lawyers regardless of what they charge per hour. That’s a demonstrable fact.
An appeals court will only consider whether the law was applied, not the character of the judge.
If the judge were to apply the law inappropriately then his rulings would make the case reversible, regardless of the case being decided by judge or jury.
And no victim or complaint.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.