Surprisingly, Judge Arthur Engoron prevents former President Donald Trump from presenting his own closing statement in his New York civil business fraud trial.
The judge objected to the proposal, insisting that Trump adhere to relevant matters and refrain from delivering a campaign speech during closing arguments.
Initially open to the idea, Judge Engoron set conditions for Trump’s participation, including a promise not to attack adversaries, the judge, or others in the court system.
Trump’s legal team, however, argued that these limitations unfairly muzzled him. When the team failed to respond to the judge’s conditions by the Wednesday deadline, Engoron assumed Trump’s non-compliance and ruled against him speaking during the closing arguments.
Expressing his discontent on his Truth Social platform, Trump called the decision MEAN & NASTY and indicated that he still plans to attend the court proceedings on Thursday. Despite the setback, Trump reiterated his desire to personally do the closing argument.
The trial holds significant stakes for Trump, as potential penalties could amount to hundreds of millions of dollars, and he may lose the ability to conduct business in New York.
Trump’s Plan for Personal Closing Statements
The allegations against him suggest that his net worth was inflated on financial statements, aiding in securing business loans and insurance.
Trump has consistently denied any wrongdoing, labeling the case a hoax and a political attack against him. The trial, brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat, follows a pretrial ruling by Judge Engoron, who concluded that Trump had engaged in fraud for years.
Despite an appeals court temporarily putting on hold the order for a receiver to take control of some of Trump’s properties, the trial continues, focusing on conspiracy, insurance fraud, and falsifying business records. Judge Engoron will ultimately decide the verdict.
While it is uncommon for individuals with legal representation to deliver their own closing arguments, Trump’s legal team had indicated his intention to do so, prompting objections from James’ office, citing concerns about testimony without cross-examination.
The clash between Trump’s desire to speak and the court’s restrictions underscores the complexity of the high-stakes trial.
or a specific category with our 
Comments are closed.