The judge overseeing Donald J. Trump's civil fraud case is questioning whether a key witness committed perjury during the former president's trial, new court filings reveal. Ta.
Judge Arthur F. Engoron asked Mr. Trump's lawyers to address the veracity of witness Allen H. Weisselberg, Mr. Trump's longtime chief financial officer. Mr. Weisselberg and Mr. Trump are both defendants in the lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James.
Judge Engoron, who is scheduled to decide the non-jury case this month, cited a recent New York Times article about Mr. Weisselberg's testimony. The article reported that Mr. Weisselberg, 76, was negotiating an agreement with the Manhattan District Attorney's Office that would require him to plead guilty to perjury for his testimony.
“Of course, I would like to know if Mr. Weisselberg has changed his mind and if he admits that he lied under oath in my courtroom in this case,” Judge Engoron said in a recent email. Addressed to lawyers for both parties. It was announced on Tuesday.
Christopher M. Kise, a lawyer representing Mr. Trump in the civil suit, declined to comment. A spokeswoman for the attorney general declined to comment, and a spokeswoman for the Manhattan district attorney's office also declined to comment. Mr. Weisselberg's lawyer, Seth Rosenberg, declined to comment on the negotiations through a spokesperson for his firm, Kleiman, Rosenberg, Kirshner & Linder.
This complication stems from the overlap in criminal and civil cases brought by New York's two law enforcement agencies.
District Attorney Alvin L. Bragg has jurisdiction over perjury and other crimes committed in Manhattan. In addition to reviewing Weisselberg's testimony in the civil fraud case, Mr. Bragg is preparing to put Mr. Trump on trial next month on criminal charges stemming from hush money payments to porn stars.
In the civil fraud case, Attorney General James has accused Trump, Weisselberg and others of fraudulently inflating the former president's net worth, and is asking a judge to impose a fine of about $370 million. The months-long trial took place in the fall.
Weisselberg was one of more than 40 witnesses. It's unclear what statements he made that caught the district attorney's attention, but shortly after Forbes magazine published an article accusing Weisselberg of lying under oath about his involvement in Trump's valuation, the attorney general's office stopped questioning him. Penthouse apartment.
In an email, Judge Engoron asked Trump and James' lawyers what they knew about the situation by Wednesday afternoon and how they would recommend Trump address it in his final judgment in the civil fraud case. I asked them to tell me.
“In a case of this magnitude, we don't want to ignore anything,” he added, suggesting he might use the plea deal as a reason to completely disqualify Weisselberg from testifying.
Judge Engoron also asked lawyers for both sides whether Mr. Weisselberg's negotiations should affect the timing of the sentence. The judge was expected to issue a ruling by January 31, potentially banning Trump from running the family business and forcing him to pay a hefty fine.
The Times reported last week that Mr. Bragg's prosecutors contacted Mr. Weisselberg's lawyers shortly after the trial ended, and negotiations over a potential defense began.
It is unclear whether Mr. Weisselberg will agree to the felony or misdemeanor charges. If he cannot reach an agreement with prosecutors, Mr. Bragg could seek to indict him.
This is not the first time Weisselberg has faced legal jeopardy. In 2022, he pleaded guilty to an unrelated tax evasion case and served about 100 days at Rikers Island Prison. The latest negotiations could result in Mr. Weisselberg, an elderly man who has never committed a violent crime, to prison for a second time.
Mr. Trump's lawyers have denounced the district attorney's long pursuit of Mr. Weisselberg as a politically motivated effort to attack Mr. Trump, the front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination. Mr. Bragg, Mr. James, and Judge Engoron are all Democrats.
But prosecutors often say that perjury must be stamped out wherever it is found to avoid corruption in the criminal justice system. Additionally, Weisselberg's testimony was given in high-profile circumstances, making it more susceptible to scrutiny.
