Trump civil fraud case: Judge fines Trump $354M, says frauds 'shock the conscience'

The former president was found to have defrauded lenders.

Last Updated: November 9, 2023, 12:09 PM EST

Former President Donald Trump has been fined $354.8 million plus approximately $100 million in interest in a civil fraud lawsuit that could alter the personal fortune and real estate empire that helped propel him to the White House. In the decision, Judge Arthur Engoron excoriated Trump, saying the president's credibility was "severely compromised," that the frauds "shock the conscience" and that Trump and his co-defendants showed a "complete lack of contrition and remorse" that he said "borders on pathological."

Engoron also hit Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump with $4 million fines and barred all three from helming New York companies for years. New York Attorney General Letitia James accused Trump and his adult sons of engaging in a decade-long scheme in which they used "numerous acts of fraud and misrepresentation" to inflate Trump's net worth in order get more favorable loan terms. The former president has denied all wrongdoing and has said he will appeal.

Top headlines:

Here's how the news is developing. All times Eastern.
Feb 16, 2024, 4:07 PM EST

Summary of penalties

Donald Trump and his adult sons were hit with millions in fines in the civil fraud trial and barred for years from being officers in New York companies. The judge said the frauds "shock the conscience."

Donald Trump: $354 million fine + approx. $100 million in interest
+ barred for 3 years from serving as officer of NY company
Donald Trump Jr.: $4 million fine
+ barred for 2 years from serving as officer of NY company
Eric Trump: $4 million fine
+ barred for 2 years from serving as officer of NY company
Former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg: $1 million fine
+ barred for 3 years from serving as officer of NY company
+ barred for life from financial management role in NY company
Former Trump Organization controller Jeffrey McConney:
+ barred for 3 years from serving as officer of NY company
+ barred for life from financial management role in NY company

Nov 09, 2023, 12:09 PM EST

Trial is a 'documents case,' state lawyer says

State attorney Kevin Wallace, arguing against the defense's motion for a directed verdict to end the trial early, reiterated that the state's case relies on documents that they say incriminate Donald Trump and his adult sons.

"This is a documents case," Wallace said. "Each of the three defendants signed documents saying they were responsible for the fair presentation of the statements."

While the defendants all testified that they relied on accountants, Wallace said by way of analogy that it's like the defense saying that using an accountant absolves an individual of filing false tax returns.

"I am liable for that fraudulence," Wallace said. "I am not relieved of my responsibility because I handed off to an accountant."

Nov 09, 2023, 11:52 AM EST

Trump's sons caught in political crossfire, defense lawyer says

Clifford Robert, a lawyer for Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., argued that his clients were caught in a political "fight between the attorney general and their father" and should be cleared from the fraud case, as part of the defense's motion for a directed verdict to end the trial

"The evidence is clear that my clients had no real involvement in the preparation of the statement of financial condition," Robert said in reference to the allegedly fraudulent documents that are at the center of the New York attorney general's case.

To demonstrate his point, Robert highlighted testimony from six witnesses who attested that Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. were not involved in the preparation of their father's financial statements.

Nov 09, 2023, 11:24 AM EST

No proof Trump engaged in conspiracy, defense argues

Trump attorney Chris Kise, arguing for a directed verdict to end the trial, said that the state relied on the testimony of former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen in an attempt to show that Trump engaged in a conspiracy to defraud lenders -- but that Cohen's inconsistent testimony doomed their effort.

Cohen testified that Trump spoke "like a mob boss" when he indirectly instructed Cohen and then-Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg to inflate his financial statements, without explicitly saying so.

"This is not a man who speaks in code," Kise said, adding that "you will know what it is he wants" within minutes of talking to Trump.

Judge Arthur Engoron responded to Kise by mentioning what Trump called his "perfect call" in 2019 in with Ukrainian President Voldymyr Zelenskiy, which became the basis for Trump's first impeachment, as an example of Trump speaking in code.

Kise said that the only other testimony that suggested there was a conspiracy to defraud lenders came from a junior Trump Organization executive who claimed Allen Weisselberg told him, "Mr. Trump wanted his net worth on the statement of financial condition to go up." Trump's lawyers have argued his testimony should be inadmissible as hearsay.

"Even if it came in, that statement alone is not proof of any agreement," Kise said.

Nov 09, 2023, 11:10 AM EST

State concedes witnesses weren't asked if they regretted loans

The attorney general's office, in response to the defense's request for a directed verdict on the basis that the state failed to show that a bank or insurance company complained of fraud on the part of the Trump Organization, conceded that none of its witnesses were asked directly during the case whether they would have moved forward with a loan to the Trump Organization had they known about the fraudulent valuations alleged by the New York AG.

"Did any bank employee say, 'We would have done it different,' and if so who?" Judge Engoron asked the state attorneys.

"Mr. Haigh said that in his deposition," state attorney Kevin Wallace responded, referring to Nicholas Haigh of Deutsche Bank -- though Wallace acknowledged Haigh was not asked that during his direct examination.

Defense attorney Christopher Kise, in his argument for a directed verdict, said the state failed to present any evidence that a bank or insurance company would have dealt with the Trump Organization differently.

"There's no, even theoretical, argument that the approvals, rates or terms would have been different," Kise said. "Ultimately what matters is the decision-making process of the bank. If they would have approved it with this knowledge, then it's not material."

Kise also argued that the inclusion of the so-called "worthless" disclaimer in Trump's statements of financial condition -- which warned lenders that the valuations in the document required judgment and that they should do their own analysis -- prove that Trump had no intent to defraud.

That prompted Engoron to interject.

"You seem to be saying the fact that someone says 'Don't believe me' proves that they are not lying," Engoron said.

Related Topics