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 says case 'manufactured to pursue a political agenda'
Defense attorney Chris Kise began his closing argument by reciting the greatest hits of Trump's defense case, highlighting the lack of victims, intent, and claims of wrongdoing.
According to Kise, Trump's net worth is higher than claimed in his statement of financial condition, and the entire case was "manufactured to pursue a political agenda" by New York Attorney General Letitia James.
"There is no testimony from anyone as to how the defendant's conduct allegedly harmed the marketplace," Kise said with Donald Trump looking on from three feet behind him.
Kise then touted the testimony of the former president, who he praised for "shaping the skyline of New York,'' as evidence that he and his sons committed no wrongdoing.
"There are few people in the world who have succeeded in the real estate industry this well, that have been this successful," Kise said of Trump.
Kise instead placed the blame for the case on Trump's deputies at the Trump Organization and his accountants at Mazars USA.
"President Trump relied on multimillion-dollar accountants at Mazars," Kise said. "Allen Weisselberg, Jeffrey McConney, and Donald Bender were the three most principally involved in the presentation and preparation of the statements of financial condition. Guess which one is a CPA? Bender."
Closings underway with no mention of Trump's role
Trump attorney Chris Kise began his closing argument after Judge Engoron opened the proceedings without addressing Trump's desire to deliver part of the defense's closing statement.
Trump is seated in his usual seat at the defense counsel table, sandwiched between his attorneys.
Engoron lobbed jokes while the pool cameras prepared to enter the courtroom.
"Lining them up -- are they going to be shot or something?" the judge quipped. "I see the usual mixture of anticipation and dread out there. Trust me, this will be painless."
'I want to speak,' Trump says on way into courtroom
Speaking to reporters before entering the courtroom, Donald Trump said he still hopes to deliver a portion of the closing statement despite Judge Engoron denying that request yesterday after Trump's lawyers declined to agree with the rules Engoron set restricting Trump from making political statements and criticizing those involved in the trial.
"I want to speak, I want to make the summation," Trump told reporters. "At this moment, the judge is not letting me make the summation because I'll bring up things that he doesn't want to hear."
"So I hope to speak, and to help my lawyers reveal all of the defects of this case," said Trump, who called the case "very unfair" and "very bad for New York state companies."
Trump delivering closing could be risky, expert says
Attorneys Chris Kise, Alina Habba and Clifford Robert are scheduled to deliver closing arguments for the defense -- in addition to former President Trump, should Judge Arthur Engoron reverse his decision to bar Trump from participating.
Multiple legal experts who ABC News spoke with described Trump's attempt to deliver a closing statement as unprecedented and potentially perilous for the former president.
"One of the old adages is, 'He who represents himself has a fool for a client,'" trial attorney and Dartmouth College senior lecturer Bruce Fredrickson told ABC News. "The thinking behind that is you lose the objectivity and impartiality that an advocate can provide on your own behalf."
Closing arguments generally allow both parties to summarize the evidence and testimony presented during the trial -- but because Trump is not a lawyer, he would only be able to speak for himself as a named defendant in the case, according to trial attorney and ABC News contributor Chris Timmons.
"There's been a lot of damage done, and I don't know how much he can do to repair it, but he certainly can make things worse," Timmons said.
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.