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.

The defense’s case will likely conclude one week ahead of schedule, according to defense attorney Clifford Robert.

Based on the remaining witnesses, the defense team is now planning to rest its case by Dec. 8.

Once the defense rests its case, the New York attorney general has an opportunity to present a rebuttal case, followed by closing arguments from both sides.

Week 8 of Donald Trump's fraud trial resumes this morning with the defense's sixth expert witnesses.

Apart from the testimony of Donald Trump Jr., the defense's case last week largely relied on multiple experts who supported the claim that asset valuation is more of an art than a science.

Similar to the state's lone expert witness, who was paid $350,000 for his testimony, Trump's expert witnesses during the first week of the defense's case were paid a hefty fee for testifying -- while others testified as a professional courtesy to Trump. Expert witness Gary Giulietti acknowledged his personal friendship with the former president, while Steven Witkoff said he had donated over $2 million to Trump's presidential campaign.

New York Attorney General Letitia James noted those connections in a social media post.

"Several of these experts are longtime friends and golf buddies of Donald Trump. One had donated millions of dollars to Donald Trump's campaign and his son even got married at Mar-a-Lago," she said.

Doug Larson's name appears across five years of Donald Trump's financial documents, according to records entered into evidence.

A longtime professional appraiser with the real estate firm Cushman & Wakefield, Larson was cited in Trump Organization documents as an expert at valuing properties like 40 Wall Street, Trump Tower, and an adjoining retail space called "Niketown." Spreadsheets entered as evidence explicitly reference multiple phone calls with Larson between 2013 and 2017.

When asked about these phone calls in court, Larson testified that no such conversations occurred.

"Is it fair to say that Mr. Trump valued Trump Tower at $526 million in conjunction with you?" state attorney Mark Ladov asked Larson.

"No, that is incorrect," Larson said.

"Were you aware that Mr. McConney was citing you as a valuation source in his work papers?" Ladov asked.

"No, I was not," replied Larson, who said he did not assist Trump Organization executives in valuing Trump Tower, Niketown, or 40 Wall Street, despite Trump's paperwork referencing him as a source.

Evidence presented by the state instead suggested that the valuations were determined using cherry-picked metrics from a generic email Larson sent clients.

"It's a way to get your name out to clients for potential work," Larson said about one such "email blast" that was used in a Trump Tower valuation.

Larson added that the valuations Trump Organization executives determined based on "consultation" with him used flawed methodologies, such as using capitalization rates related to office buildings to appraise the retail Niketown building.

"It doesn't make sense," Larson said about Niketown's $287 million valuation.

"It's inappropriate and inaccurate," Larson said about the Trump Organization relying on his name to support their valuations. "I should have been told, and appraisals should have been ordered."