I have litigated civil cases for more than 40 years. While I do not have specific knowledge of the legal issues in the Trump case, here are a few observations:
1. This is a civil, not criminal case. “Innocent Until Proven Guilty” generally is not a phrase used in a civil lawsuit.
2. While Letitia James has the burden of proof, it is not beyond a reasonable doubt. Her burden is either by a preponderance of the evidence or clear and convincing evidence. Both are lower levels of proof than beyond a reasonable doubt.
3. With regard to a jury trial, it may very well be that the statute does not permit it. If the remedy sought is equitable relief rather than legal relief, a jury trial may not be available.
4. If a jury trial was an option, one wonders why James would not have requested one. A New York City jury would almost certainly decide in her favor.
5. With regard to the statute of limitations, it may be that pre-trial motions were filed, asking for dismissal on those grounds, but were denied at the time by the judge.
Without being closely involved in the proceedings, it is wrong to criticize Trump’s attorneys. If anyone has more detailed knowledge of what has actually occurred in this litigation involving these issues I would love to hear their comments.