Judge Engoron is NOT ALLOWING DONALD TRUMP to Deliver Closing Arguments - Civil Fraud Trial.

Wednesday, January 10, 2024

This is another Public Relations WIN for former President/Presidential Candidate Donald J. Trump.

But damn, don't these judges and prosecutors understand the that Mr. Trump will most likely be President Trump once again, in just 12 months and 10 days from today? Do they not comprehend...or care, about the ramifications?

Former President Trump will not be allowed to make his own closing argument in his New York civil fraud trial after his lawyers refused to guarantee he would stick to matters “relevant” to the case.

A day before scheduled closing arguments, Judge Arthur Engoron told Trump’s legal team that the former president will not speak in court.

An email exchange between Engoron and Trump’s lawyers posted to the case’s docket showed a testy back-and-forth over the types of comments Trump would be allowed to make.

Last week, Trump attorney Chris Kise informed Engoron’s principal law clerk that three attorneys and the former president himself intended to give closing remarks. Hours later, a lawyer with the New York attorney general’s office staunchly objected.

Source: thehill.com...

New York Judge Arthur Engoron and New York A.G./Prosecutor Letitia James have taken themselves into uncharted waters, by prosecuting Donald Trump without a jury, and arbitrarily self-determining how badly to punish the former/next U.S. President and his family. Soon, they will realize the uncharted waters are filled with very dangerous sharks and other creatures...millions of them.


-CareWeMust

a reply to: WeMustCare

Apparently Trump would not agree to be bound to the same things his lawyers are for a closing argument. To stick to the facts of the case. The judge stated clearly:

He may not comment on irrelevant matters,” Engoron wrote in the email. “In particular, and without limitation, he may not deliver a campaign speech, and he may not impugn myself, my staff, plaintiff, plaintiff’s staff, or the New York State Court System, none of which is relevant to this case, and all of which, except commenting on my staff, can be done, and is being done, in other forums.”

Trump apparently did not really want to do a closing argument as he would not agree.

Some may think bringing up Biden, or doing a campaign speech, or calling the judge's clerk a communist devil or whatever would be cool, but actually not an appropriate closing argument.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: WeMustCare

Apparently Trump would not agree to be bound to the same things his lawyers are for a closing argument. To stick to the facts of the case. The judge stated clearly:

He may not comment on irrelevant matters,” Engoron wrote in the email. “In particular, and without limitation, he may not deliver a campaign speech, and he may not impugn myself, my staff, plaintiff, plaintiff’s staff, or the New York State Court System, none of which is relevant to this case, and all of which, except commenting on my staff, can be done, and is being done, in other forums.”

Trump apparently did not really want to do a closing argument as he would not agree.

what are the official rules for a closing argument?

a reply to: frogs453

How often do judges give the defendant a list of acceptable talking points before closing arguments?

a reply to: WeMustCare

Trump wanted to turn it into a campaign speech. Engoron said he had to abide by the same rules that anyone giving a closing statement must abide by. Trump refused. Engoron then extended Trump's deadline a third time and said if Trump wanted to give closing statements he would have to agree to abide by the rules by that deadline. Trump did not respond.

The only person that prevented Trump was Trump. But, as history shows, his supporters will never hold him accountable for his own actions.

a reply to: WeMustCare

Well, if he is legally represented, by three attorneys, it would be a bit odd for him to be allowed to give closing submissions?

Making veiled threats to the judiciary, are we?

Goes with the territory apparently.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: WeMustCare

Well, if he is legally represented, by three attorneys, it would be a bit odd for him to be allowed to give closing submissions?

Making veiled threats to the judiciary, are we?

Goes with the territory apparently.

Imagine a judge taking your money and your property, and not allowing you to say what you want to say before rendering the pre-determined verdict.

Would YOU just accept it and go on your merry way in life?

Of course he would!! If you have done nothing wrong then you have nothing to fear….

a reply to: WeMustCare

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: WeMustCare

Apparently Trump would not agree to be bound to the same things his lawyers are for a closing argument. To stick to the facts of the case. The judge stated clearly:

He may not comment on irrelevant matters,” Engoron wrote in the email. “In particular, and without limitation, he may not deliver a campaign speech, and he may not impugn myself, my staff, plaintiff, plaintiff’s staff, or the New York State Court System, none of which is relevant to this case, and all of which, except commenting on my staff, can be done, and is being done, in other forums.”

Trump apparently did not really want to do a closing argument as he would not agree.

what are the official rules for a closing argument?

According to the American Bar Association.

The lawyers’ closing arguments or summations discuss the evidence and properly drawn inferences. The lawyers cannot talk about issues outside the case or about evidence that was not presented.

originally posted by: WeMustCare
a reply to: frogs453

How often do judges give the defendant a list of acceptable talking points before closing arguments?

How often do defendants want to give closing arguments themselves to discuss matters outside the case?

a reply to: WeMustCare

But, he has three attorneys to speak for him?

I have had cases when the defendant who was represented asked the Judge (when it was going badly for them) "may I speak"?

Judge, "No you may not".

Maybe things are a bit weirder over the Pond?

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: WeMustCare

Apparently Trump would not agree to be bound to the same things his lawyers are for a closing argument. To stick to the facts of the case. The judge stated clearly:

He may not comment on irrelevant matters,” Engoron wrote in the email. “In particular, and without limitation, he may not deliver a campaign speech, and he may not impugn myself, my staff, plaintiff, plaintiff’s staff, or the New York State Court System, none of which is relevant to this case, and all of which, except commenting on my staff, can be done, and is being done, in other forums.”

Trump apparently did not really want to do a closing argument as he would not agree.

what are the official rules for a closing argument?

According to the American Bar Association.

The lawyers’ closing arguments or summations discuss the evidence and properly drawn inferences. The lawyers cannot talk about issues outside the case or about evidence that was not presented.

What about the person whose property and money is being taken?

For ENGORON to tell Trump this within 24 hours of his Mother-In-Law dying, is cold blooded.

this whole thing should be thrown out... with the info about the DAs relationship with the prosecutor

a reply to: HatesFreshAir

Wrong case for those baseless accusations.

a reply to: HatesFreshAir
This thread is about the NY fraud trial. You're thinking about the Georgia RICO case with Fani Willis and her "stud" boyfriend Special Prosecutor.

a reply to: WeMustCare

my bad, hard to keep up with all the hitjobs

originally posted by: WeMustCare

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: WeMustCare

Apparently Trump would not agree to be bound to the same things his lawyers are for a closing argument. To stick to the facts of the case. The judge stated clearly:

He may not comment on irrelevant matters,” Engoron wrote in the email. “In particular, and without limitation, he may not deliver a campaign speech, and he may not impugn myself, my staff, plaintiff, plaintiff’s staff, or the New York State Court System, none of which is relevant to this case, and all of which, except commenting on my staff, can be done, and is being done, in other forums.”

Trump apparently did not really want to do a closing argument as he would not agree.

what are the official rules for a closing argument?

According to the American Bar Association.

The lawyers’ closing arguments or summations discuss the evidence and properly drawn inferences. The lawyers cannot talk about issues outside the case or about evidence that was not presented.

What about the person whose property and money is being taken?

For ENGORON to tell Trump this within 24 hours of his Mother-In-Law dying, is cold blooded.

The rules are about what can be covered in the closing statement. Why would they be different for Trump?

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: HatesFreshAir

Wrong case for those baseless accusations.

I bet if anyone looked hard enough, the same kind or worse improprieties are involved in this case.
As JinMI posted in the Georgia case thread, the truth is probably the same in both cases.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

But they probably just talked about yoga and the grandkids right?

One thing I noticed is that neither you or any of your comrades want to join that discussion for SOME reason?
I wonder why?

a reply to: network dude

Here you go. This applies to civil cases:

Permissible Scope. Closings may contain arguments of both the facts and the law.

Matters Not in Evidence. What is included in a closing argument must be supported by the evidence on the record. An attorney may not “‘travel outside the record and inject into his argument facts of his own knowledge or other facts not included in the evidence.

Facts of Other Cases. Closing arguments must not include statements of the facts and outcomes of other cases as a basis for arguing that the jury must come to the same conclusion in the case before the court.

Misstatements of the Evidence and Impermissible Inferences. Closing arguments must include only the legitimate inferences that may be drawn from the evidence.”

the link is a pdf which also notes the legal citations which I did not include as they can be numerous and would make this lengthy. Closing Arguments In Civil Trials


Campaign speeches, talking about his legal cases, calling court staff names, all the things the judge stated Trump could not do and Trump did not want to adhere to, do not fall in the scope outlined above.

a reply to: WeMustCare

"Poor you. Case dismissed then".

Seriously?