While presiding over former President Donald Trump’s civil fraud trial, a Manhattan judge threatened to have Trump removed from the courtroom if his lengthy narratives instead of straight answers persisted.
The warning was issued to Trump amid courtroom proceedings dated November 6, 2023, as he attempted to field an expansive response to allegations accusing him of overstating assets between 2011 and 2021.
This ongoing lawsuit, initiated by New York Attorney General Letitia James, is centered on a hefty $250 million in damages. The trial carries substantial implications for Trump and his business.
At a pointed moment, Judge Arthur Engoron directed Trump’s legal team to ensure Trump responds tersely with “yes” or “no.” In case of continued non-adherence, Judge Engoron warned he would attribute all adverse presumptions against Trump.
Tensions escalated when Trump’s counsel, Alina Habba, tried defending his right to exhaustive responses, leading to a curt order from Judge Engoron for her to “sit down.”
The warning from the judge follows a chain of confrontations with Trump. The former president has consistently claimed that Judge Engoron passed rulings against him without a proper grasp of the case.
The trial aims to establish if Trump’s organization falsely inflated the value of his assets for loan approvals and tax benefits. Despite the prosecution’s efforts, Trump is looking to distance himself from the financial records in question.
Judge Engoron had earlier penalized Trump, imposing a $5,000 fine for defying an issued gag order. Trump’s violation stemmed from an online post disparaging the judge’s law clerk, which remained live on his website.
This legal face-off is crucial as this marks Trump’s first in-person testimony in the numerous legal issues he currently faces. In this civil trial, Trump is obligated to testify as constitutional rights provided by the Fifth Amendment are unavailable.
The trial has garnered attention not just for the grave allegations but also because of Trump’s convention-breaking responses. At times, he has strayed off into peripheral topics, such as his financial statements’ disclaimer clause, which he perceives as a liability shield.
The legal backdrop is also important because of a federal case where Judge Tanya Chutkan imposed a partial gag order on Trump. This order was perceived as necessary to protect the legal proceedings’ credibility as Trump’s public declarations resulted in “grave threats.”
