Longtime Trump Organization controller Jeffrey McConney, a defendant in the attorney general's case, denied withholding any documents from the company's outside accountants -- appearing to contradict testimony from Mazars USA accountant Donald Bender.

"We provided him everything he needed," McConney said, adding that Bender could request any document he wanted from the Trump Organization.

McConney, testifying for the defense, added that Bender also could directly communicate with individuals in the Trump Organization to directly ask questions during the process of organizing Trump's financial statements that are at the center of the case.

"Bender would come in and talk to anyone he wanted," McConney said.

When Bender testified last month during the state's case, he said that he directly asked McConney if the company had more appraisals, to which McConney responded, "That's all we have."

"They were not giving us all the documents that we needed, potentially, to compile the compilation," Bender testified.

Asked about the allegation on the witness stand, McConney denied he withheld anything from Bender.

"Did you ever hide anything from Donald Bender?" defense attorney Jesus Suarez asked.

"No," McConney responded.

Forty-five days after he began his testimony as the third witness in the state's case, former Trump Organization controller and co-defendant Jeffrey McConney has returned to the witness stand for the defense.

When he testified last month, McConney -- who was the primary person responsible for the valuations in Trump's statement of financial statements between 2011 and 2017 -- struggled to recall specific details about the preparation of the financial documents, though he acknowledged he took direction from Eric Trump about the value of a Westchester golf course.

This afternoon, after asking some preliminary questions about McConney's biography, defense attorney Jesus Suarez began asking McConney pointed questions about Mazars USA accountant Donald Bender, another witness in the state's case.

"Whatever he asked for, we would do," McConney said about Bender's role in the process of compiling Trump's financial statement.

State attorney Andrew Amer began his cross-examination of defense expert David Miller by highlighting that his testimony appeared to contradict Miller's own expert report.

During his direct examination, Miller was asked if he has ever seen any insurance underwriters rely on media outlets when reviewing their surety programs.

"Prior to this, no," Miller responded, referencing how underwriters at Zurich cited articles from Forbes and USA Today in their 2021 annual review of Trump's policies.

However, Miller's own report acknowledged that "some underwriters do not require financials and instead use their experience and other means (such as Forbes and USA Today) to satisfy their underwriting needs."

When Amer suggested that the finding in Miller's report appeared to directly contradict his testimony, the defense objected.

"It seems completely inconsistent. What am I missing?" Judge Arthur Engoron responded.

Miller clarified that he has seen underwriters cite external sources like media reports; however, the Zurich document was the first time he specifically saw Forbes and USA Today cited as sources.

Defense witness David Miller, an expert in insurance underwriting, testified that the Zurich insurance company worked with the Trump Organization largely to protect its relationship with their broker, AON Risk Solutions.

"The relationship with AON was very important, and keeping business intact was very important," Miller said about Zurich, which he said made a "business decision" to insure the Trump Organization's properties.

The testimony appears to be a move to weaken the New York attorney general's allegation that the Trump Organization used their inflated financial statements to get progressively favorable surety terms.

Judge Arthur Engoron was skeptical to qualify Miller as an expert before he relented to the defense's request.

"I don't see why you're an expert in what was just said," Engoron said after Miller spent 20 minutes listing his professional experience.

Both Engoron and state attorney Andrew Amer, who called the testimony a "waste of time," criticized Miller's ability to testify about the decisions made by Zurich and AON.

Citing their ethical obligations, lawyers for the defendants in Donald Trump's civil fraud trial declined to provide details about "rumors of any kind" involving former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg and urged Judge Arthur Engoron to make a decision solely based on the evidence presented at trial, after Engoron asked them to weigh in on public reports that Weisselberg was engaged in plea talks with the Manhattan DA's office to resolve a potential perjury charge.

In a letter submitted to Judge Engoron Wednesday, defense attorney Clifford Robert urged the judge to strictly consider the record from the trial in his final decision, describing his request to provide information about Weisselberg based on a New York Times article "unprecedented, inappropriate and troubling."

"The Article simply does not provide any principled basis for the Court to reopen the record or question the veracity of Mr. Weisselberg's testimony in this case. Indeed, we respectfully submit that the Court's request for comment on this speculative media account is unprecedented, inappropriate, and troubling," Robert wrote.

In a separate letter, Alina Habba -- who represents Weisselberg in the civil case but is not his criminal defense lawyer -- declined to provide any information about the potential perjury and argued that no further action was needed on the matter.

"The New York Times article is neither admissible nor reliable, and it should not be considered in Your Honor's determination as to the merits of this case," Habba wrote. "We urge you to render your decision based solely on the evidence now before you."

"Court decisions are supposed to be made based on the evidence at trial, not on media speculation," defense attorney Chris Kise said in a statement.