A report from Raw Story dated Saturday, January 13, 2024, former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance contends that Donald Trump should no longer receive preferential treatment in court following his impassioned courtroom address during the fraud trial.
During Thursday’s courtroom proceedings, where Judge Arthur Engoron granted Trump the opportunity to speak during closing arguments, Vance expressed her concerns on her Civil Discourse Substack platform. She emphasized the necessity of treating Trump on par with any other party in court, signaling a departure from perceived leniency granted due to his former presidential status.
The incident in question occurred during closing arguments when Judge Engoron permitted Trump to address the court without being under oath. Vance argues that this departure from standard courtroom procedures provided Trump with a platform to disseminate falsehoods aimed at energizing his supporters. She underscores the irregularity of such special treatment, asserting that other parties would not enjoy similar privileges.
More Read
Vance contends that Trump’s exploitation of this opportunity highlights the importance of judges refraining from extending additional courtesies solely based on his past presidential role. She stresses the significance of holding Trump accountable through standard legal procedures and dispelling any perception that he is above the law.
Critiquing the tendency to handle Trump delicately, Vance urges the courts not to shy away from ensuring fair treatment. In her analysis, she advocates for a more stringent approach, proposing that Trump should only be allowed to speak in court, particularly to a jury, when under oath and on the witness stand. She argues against providing opportunities for Trump to engage in disruptive behavior, urging the courts to demonstrate that he is not exempt from standard legal procedures.
This call to end “special treatment” for Trump arrives at a critical juncture with ongoing legal proceedings surrounding him. Vance’s perspective raises questions about the broader implications of accommodating a former president in legal settings and the potential impact on the perception of justice.
Her stance reflects a growing sentiment that the courts should treat Trump without favoritism. The incident in Judge Engoron’s courtroom serves as a catalyst for reevaluating the approach to Trump’s legal proceedings, emphasizing the need for fairness, transparency, and adherence to standard courtroom protocols.
This development adds another layer to the ongoing discussions about accountability and legal consequences for Trump’s actions, shedding light on the challenges of navigating high-profile trials involving a former president.
