Donald Trump wants to deliver his own NY fraud-trial closing arguments, but the judge would have to let him
David Dee Delgado/Getty Images
- Trump wants to deliver part of his NY fraud trial closing statements himself, ABC News reported Tuesday.
- Under state civil-practice rules, defendants can help make closing arguments with court approval.
- Closings are set for Thursday; a decision on Trump's unusual request has not yet been made.
Former President Donald Trump wants to deliver part of his New York fraud trial closing arguments himself on Thursday, ABC News reported.
And as bizarre as that request sounds — given Trump's lack of legal training and his stable of defense lawyers — state civil-procedure rules actually allow him to do so, but only if the judge says it's OK.
New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron has not decided whether Trump will be allowed to contribute to closing arguments, a trial insider said Tuesday night, speaking on background.
New York Law — the Civil Practice Law and Rules, to be precise — says a lawsuit's plaintiff or defendant "may not act in person in the action except by consent of the court."
Insider
Neither Trump's attorney, Alina Habba, nor a spokesperson immediately commented on his request.
So-called "hybrid representation" is not uncommon in criminal trials, but it's rare in civil cases, said veteran New York City attorney Ron Kuby.
"Judge Engoron may well simply say, 'Go ahead. You cannot possibly do more damage to yourself than you've already done,'" Kuby said.
There would be little downside for the judge in approving Trump's request, he added, noting, "He'd never be reversed on appeal over this."
In delivering closing arguments, Trump would be bound by the same rules as an attorney would, Kuby said.
"They can only argue what the evidence has shown, what the evidence has not shown, and what reasonable inferences can be drawn from the evidence," Kuby said of pro-se defendants.
"The defendant can't just sit up there and shriek until the judge hits them with a rolled-up newspaper," he quipped.
A defendant chiming in on his lawyer's closing statements would be "highly unusual," said career New York City trial attorney Michael Farkas.
Still, "it's not prohibited by the rules," agreed Farkas, a retired military judge.
"And Judge Engoron would be hard-pressed to deny such a request," he added. "Otherwise, it may blow back on him" in an appeal "as potential prejudice against Trump."
Closing arguments are the last pre-verdict step in New York Attorney General Letitia James' nearly six-year investigation into Trump and the Trump Organization, the former president's Manhattan-headquartered real estate empire.
James' office alleges Trump and long-standing Trump Org. executives conspired over the course of a decade to fraudulently inflate his net worth by more than two billion dollars a year in annual financial statements to lenders and insurers.
She has asked Engoron to order Trump and his co-defendants to pay back $370 million in "ill-gotten gains" they say he pocketed through illegal interest savings, property sale profits, and severance pay packages to the scheme's alleged co-defendants.
Trump has repeatedly insisted he has not committed fraud and has condemned the AG's probe — and the three-month trial now nearing its end — as a political witch hunt.
Engoron has promised a verdict by month's end. He already found, pre-trial, that Trump, his two eldest sons, former CFO Allen Weisselberg, and former comptroller Jeff McConney, committed fraud in exaggerating Trump's worth.
The upcoming verdict will determine if Trump and his five co-defendants are further liable for conspiring to break state document fraud statutes and what the final financial penalties would be.