Former President Donald Trump’s repeated attempts at a “directed verdict” in his bank fraud trial have drawn sharp criticism from the New York Attorney General’s office. Special counsel Andrew Amer, representing the AG’s office, derided Trump’s legal strategy in a court filing on Monday, asserting that the maneuvers were nothing more than political stunts.
Throughout the extensive three-month trial involving Trump, two of his sons, executives, and various Trump companies, the defense team sought a directed verdict—a legal tactic claiming an immediate and complete victory in court. Amer expressed skepticism, stating, “Unlike a fine Bordeaux, defendants’ case for a directed verdict does not improve with age,” as reported by The Daily Beast.
The AG’s office, in a comprehensive three-page filing, accused Trump and his co-defendants of wasting valuable court time for publicity. Amer remarked that these attempts became increasingly absurd over time, despite evidence presented during the trial supporting allegations that Trump consistently provided false information on personal financial statements to secure bank loans and insurance policies.
More Read
Justice Arthur F. Engoron consistently rejected these directed verdict attempts, displaying growing frustration with the defense’s legal maneuvers. Amer noted, “The motion, as with many of the defendants’ courtroom antics and maneuvers during the course of this trial, is nothing more than a political stunt designed to provide Mr. Trump, his co-defendants, and their counsel with sound bites for press conferences, Truth Social posts, and cable news appearances.”
As the legal proceedings near their conclusion for the year, closing arguments are scheduled for January. The judge is expected to make decisions regarding potential penalties for the Trumps early next year. The AG’s scathing critique underscores the challenges faced by the former president and his legal team as they navigate the complex terrain of the bank fraud trial.
