Trump civil fraud case: Judge fines Trump $354 million, says frauds 'shock the conscience'
The former president was found to have defrauded lenders.
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:
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
Trump lawyer calls NY AG's 'Pharma Bro' comparison 'irresponsible'
A day after New York Attorney General Letitia James cited a ruling involving "Pharma Bro" Martin Shkreli to support a lifetime real estate ban for Donald Trump, a defense lawyer responded in a letter to the court calling the comparison "misplaced and irresponsible."
The New York AG said Tuesday that a federal appeals court decision upholding a lifetime industry ban for Shkreli should convince Judge Arthur Engoron to impose a lifetime real estate ban on Trump.
Defense attorney Clifford Robert, in response, wrote Wednesday that "the absurdity of the Attorney General's latest effort would be almost comical but for the sobering future consequences of her shameless abuse of power."
Robert argued that Trump's fraud case lacks witnesses, complaints, and victims compared to Shkreli's case.
In a statement to ABC News, Trump attorney Chris Kise said the ruling in Trump's case could have far-reaching implications for the New York business community.
"This is not just about President Trump. Every major bank CEO and every Wall Street participant should speak out now before the Attorney General's shocking and tyrannical interference in the capital markets places all New York business transactions at risk," Kise said.
NY AG cites 'Pharma Bro' ruling in seeking lifetime ban for Trump
The New York attorney general's office says a federal appeals court decision upholding a lifetime industry ban for disgraced "Pharma Bro" Martin Shkreli should convince Judge Arthur Engoron to impose a lifetime real estate ban on Donald Trump.
In a letter to Judge Engoron, state attorney Colleen Faherty cited Tuesday's decision in the Shkreli case to justify the NY AG's request to ban the former president from the New York real estate industry for life.
According to Faherty, New York State Executive Law 63(12) -- which was used in the NY AG's lawsuits against both Trump and Shkreli -- gives the court the ability to "issue a permanent and plenary ban in a particular industry."
"63(12) is the Swiss Army knife of the AG's Office," said Tristan Snell, a former lawyer with the New York attorney General's office who used the law to sue Trump over the now-defunct real estate seminar called Trump University. "If you don't have laws like this in place, that you basically allow lies and misrepresentations to be endemic."
A final decision in Trump's civil fraud case is expected later this month.
James releases video of Trump's April 2023 deposition
New York Attorney General Letitia James on Friday released video of former President Trump's April 2023 deposition in the case.
Video of the deposition, the transcript of which was released by the attorney general in August 2023, was released as part of a public records request.
As ABC News reported in August, Trump in the deposition called his real estate portfolio "the Mona Lisa of properties" and suggested his assets were worth far more than what appeared in his statements of financial condition that are at the center of the New York AG's case.
The videotaped deposition proved to be a preview of Trump's testimony at trial earlier this month, in which he bragged about his finances and declared himself "an innocent man."
Court of Appeals upholds limited gag order
New York's highest court has upheld the limited gag order in Donald Trump's civil fraud trial.
"On the Court's own motion, appeal dismissed, without costs, upon the ground that no substantial constitutional question is directly involved. Motion for a stay dismissed as academic," New York's Court of Appeals said in a two-sentence ruling issued Tuesday.
The gag order barred Trump and his lawyers from commenting on Judge Arthur Engoron's staff during the former president's 11-week civil fraud trial.
A decision in the case is expected later this month, after closing arguments wrapped up last week.
Defense presses state's expert on his analysis
Defense lawyer Jesus Suarez spent the first hour of his cross-examination working to cast doubt on expert Michiel McCarty's analysis, which found that Trump defrauded lenders out of $168 million in interest.
"Who created the universe of documents for you to review? It was the New York attorney general, right?" Suarez said before launching into a rapid-fire succession of questions regarding which lenders McCarty had spoken to in the course of his analysis.
"Did you ever interview anyone from Deutsche Bank?" Suarez asked.
"No," McCarty said.
"Did you ever interview anyone from Ladder Capital?" Suarez asked.
"No," McCarty repeated.
"Did you ever interview anyone from Mazars," Suarez asked.
"No," McCarty responded.
"Did you ever interview anyone from the Trump Organization?" Suarez asked.
"No," McCarty said again.