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.


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


0

Closing arguments set for Jan. 11

Judge Engoron has set a date of Jan. 11 for closing arguments in the trial.

Both parties face a noon deadline on Jan. 5 to file their briefs, and closing arguments are scheduled to take place in person on Jan. 11, the judge decided after considering scheduling proposals from both the state and the defense.

Engoron said he plans to issue his decision in the case "a few weeks after" closing arguments.

"I would hope this [January] but no guarantees," Engoron said.

State attorneys had requested closing statements take place Dec. 13, while attorneys for Donald Trump suggested closing arguments be presented 60 days after both parties submitted paper filings.


Judge says he'll 'rigorously' enforce limited gag order

Judge Arthur Engoron warned that he plans to "rigorously" enforce the limited gag order he handed down last month, which prohibits Trump and his attorneys from commenting on the judge's staff, after an appeals court reinstated it this morning.

"I want to make sure all counsel are aware, and they probably already are aware, that this morning the Appellate Division First Department issued a decision vacating the stay on the two gag orders that I imposed earlier on this case," Engoron said in court. "So I intend to enforce the gag orders rigorously and vigorously, and I want to make sure that counsel informs their clients of the fact that the stay was vacated."

"We're aware. It's a tragic day for the rule of law, but we are aware," Kise responded.

"It is what it is," Engoron quipped.


Appellate court reinstates limited gag order

A New York appellate court has upheld the limited gag order imposed by Judge Engoron in the ongoing trial.

The decision reinstates the limited gag order Engoron imposed on Trump and his attorneys prohibiting them from disparaging court staff, particularly his principle law clerk, who has come under attack by Trump on social media.

The limited gag order was temporarily lifted two weeks ago by appellate judge after Trump's lawyers sued Judge Engoron.

Engoron's lawyer wrote in support of the gag order, saying that Engoron and his clerk have been inundated with threats since Trump began his attacks.

"It is ordered that the motion is denied; the interim relief granted by order of a Justice of this Court, dated November 16, 2023, is hereby vacated," the appellate court said in its ruling issued this morning.


Trial isn't likely to conclude until January, says judge

Closing statements in the trial aren't likely to occur until January, according to an updated schedule proposed by Judge Engoron.

The trial was initially expected to wrap up in December.

Rather than have the closing arguments immediately follow the conclusion of the defense's case and a brief rebuttal case by the state, Engoron signaled that he would prefer to receive simultaneous paper briefings from both parties, followed by oral arguments in January.

He did not set a date for the closing statements or oral arguments.

State attorney Kevin Wallace initially requested that Engoron set closing statements for Dec. 13. Donald Trump is set to testify on Dec. 11, and Wallace said the state may to present a brief rebuttal case, including testimony from two witnesses, on Dec. 12.

However defense attorneys suggested that both parties submit paper filings simultaneously, then receive questions from the judge and present oral arguments in 60 days.

"There is just an awful lot of argument to cover," said Trump attorney Chris Kise.

Wallace objected to defense's proposed plan "stretching this out to February," and instead suggested a two-week period after the close of evidence.

"I like the idea of the briefs, then the argument," Engoron said, adding that he would set a "just right" date between the two proposed options.


Expert calls Trump CPA's testimony 'not professionally plausible'

Expert witness Jason Flemmons cast doubt on the testimony of the Trump Organization's former external accountant Donald Bender, who said he would have wanted to review any appraisals that the Trump Organization conducted.

"That's not something that is required by professional standards," said Flemmons, testifying for the defense. "His testimony was not professionally plausible."

That prompted a strong objection from state attorney Kevin Wallace.

"Is he trying to say the witness is lying?" Wallace said.

"Not to put too fine a point on it," Judge Engoron quipped.

Asked to confirm what he meant by "professional plausible," Flemmons said it would be "highly unusual" for Bender to request appraisals outside what was mentioned in the statement of financial condition.

"Accountants in the industry do not go seeking records for things that are not in the four corners of the statement of financial condition," Flemmons said.

Court was subsequently adjourned for the day, with Flemmons scheduled to continue his testimony tomorrow.