LISTEN HERE:
The judiciary has resolved that Ivanka Trump has a civic obligation to present her testimony in an ongoing trial relating to alleged civil fraud in New York concerning her father.
Despite attempts by Ivanka Trump’s legal representatives to quash a subpoena demanding her statement, presiding Judge Arthur Engoron rejected the motion. He further clarified that her testimony would not be arranged prior to Wednesday, allowing for the possibility of an appeal to be lodged.
The appeal was indeed submitted following a decision by the appeals court to relieve Ivanka Trump of her defendant status. Arguing against the necessity of her court appearance, her defense contended, according to CNN, that she no longer needed to be subjected to the court proceedings.
Judge Engoron counter-argued, maintaining that Ivanka Trump was expected to furnish proof in the form of an affidavit to demonstrate that she no longer maintains domicile or employment in the state. The reason behind this being that only she can provide such confirmation and it was considered untimely to do so after the fact.
The court’s disposition took a definitive stance when Judge Engoron declined to acknowledge a deposition from Ivanka Trump that had been recorded in Florida. This judgment was handed down after the first ruling was issued. ‘We want her here in person,’ he stated, emphasizing his preference for in-person testimonies.
Countering this, the legal team representing Ivanka Trump accused New York Attorney General Letitia James of seeking to capitalize on the media attention surrounding this case. The defense contended that the court held no jurisdiction concerning Ivanka Trump, as she has not been a resident or employed in New York since 2017.
In defending this position, a member of Ivanka’s legal team referenced the subpoena as ‘continued harassment of President Trump’s children.’ Furthermore, they accused the prosecution of intending to exploit the presence of Ivanka Trump in court to stir media hype and accused it of attempting to orchestrate a media circus.
Letitia James had filed a substantial $250 million lawsuit against the Trump family in the previous year, with allegations of a protracted fraud scheme aimed at personal financial gain. Individuals implicated included the former president, his eldest children, and top-tier executives within the Trump Organization.
Ivanka Trump was initially indicted along with other family members, but she was then left out of an agreement between James’ office and the Trump Organization concerning the statute of limitations. Subsequently, her name was removed as a co-defendant by a New York appeals court in mid-2021.
Nonetheless, the office of the New York attorney general listed Ivanka Trump as a potential witness. In response to this, Ivanka’s counsel argued against her eligibility to testify on the basis of her absence from New York over an extended period.
Regarding the subpoena, the defense argued that it was invalid given that Ivanka was no longer involved in the case. The argument was broadened to include the New York-based firms that were issued with the subpoena.
Regarding representation, it was suggested that Eric Trump would take the stand on behalf of the Trump Organization. On the other side, the Attorney General’s Office advanced the position that Ivanka Trump maintains certain affiliations with the organization and has knowledge about a loan associated with the renovation of the Old Post Office in Washington, DC.
The attorney general’s charge sheet includes an alleged fraudulent activity concerning a loan provided by Deutsche Bank for the project at the Old Post Office. In this context, the accusation against Ivanka Trump was that she was the lead on the project, not Eric Trump.
Further investigation into the case hinted that Ivanka Trump might have had a personal interest at stake when negotiating the loan from Deutsche Bank, driven by the monetary benefits she could derive from the Old Post Office deal. Engoron further suggested a tighter focus on Ivanka’s involvement in the loan related to Deutsche Bank and the Old Post Office.
The closing highlight of the court session was a sudden outburst by Trump who left his security detail taken aback by leaving the courtroom abruptly after heated conversations with the judge.
Reports suggest that Trump lost his temper following negative remarks from the judge, and was penalized for breaching a silence order imposed on him by violating his rights to speak out against the judge’s court staff. The former President was heard murmuring, ‘Unbelievable,’ before exiting the courtroom, after which he loosely suggested to the media that they had scored a victory in the trial.
