I am actually somewhat surprised that this request even needs to be made. That is, isn’t it a fundamental element of ANY trial that only evidence directly relevant to the proceeding can be raised? Doesn’t every witness and every question asked of any particular witness need to meet a relatively strict standard of relevance? Obviously IANAL, but I certainly would have assumed that what they are explicitly requesting here would go without saying.
9 Likes
I bet his lawyers make him pay up front.
6 Likes
“Your Honor, the defense feels it’s unfair to hold our client accountable for statements he introduced into the public record, or to use his public statements as evidence that he has a functioning brain.”
4 Likes
7 Likes
Donald Trump wants to bar any of his statements on the campaign trail – including his tweets, stump speeches and surrogate statements – from being used as evidence against him in the fraud trial over Trump University.
if its related to Trump U, then that request will be denied.
As part of the request, they have also asked that evidence related to his “tax issues,” “personal conduct accusations,” beauty pageants, casinos, bankruptcies and other matters that have emerged as a part of his presidential bid be left out at trail.
if any of the aforementioned is relevant to the upcoming case, that request will be denied as well.
5 Likes
Trump is a bona fide sow cow!
well Trump is under the impression that Curiel is prejudiced against him.
3 Likes
Geez, can you imagine having Trump as your client? An attorney’s worst nightmare - a client who doesn’t know when to STFU, and who won’t take direction from anyone.
11 Likes
This is a standard pretrial motion. The funny part is the “Mexican” smear, which is irrelevant, but the victim of the smear is the judge ruling the motion. Of course he can agree the smear is irrelevant to the case and announce that it won’t affect his rulings, but then quietly twist the knife in Trump’s back. .
8 Likes
This is gonna be a good trial. A dessert course after the main fare, if you will.
And you will.
8 Likes
I don’t know Donald…maybe Judge Curiel wants to hear your best words and consider what you meant.
4 Likes
Oh, I’d still get the fees up front. In cash. Folding money.
7 Likes
most of it will.
now Curiel will likely dare Trump to be an a-- in his court room. However that’s due to something called contempt of court…
3 Likes
eggzactly
Oh, really?
You know Trump KNOWS what’s coming.
2 Likes
The motion is over-reaching. Decisions about admissibility of specific items of evidence will be made at trial (or a pre-trial conference).
8 Likes
This isn’t about the trial. It’s about setting up a line of attacks on appeal from the jury’s verdict, should it go against Trump’s side.
The motion itself won’t be granted, because it ignores the fact that the plaintiffs have interests as well, and that evidence law entitles them to scale this ‘Election Room Talk’ wall to pursue their legitmate strategies. Most acutely, it’s inappropriate for a trial judge to tie the hands of the plaintiffs on the bases of abstractions, contingencies and possibilities.
What the judge should do - what THIS judge WILL do, given his track record - is to put down in writing in his ruling on the motion that it’s actually his ROLE at trial to make rulings on such things as issues, questions, strategies & tactics arise.
It bears repeating that the Trump is not the only defendant in this case, and that the lead trial attorney for the defendants’ side, Daniel Petrocelli (the attorney who led the plaintiffs’ side in the civil claims against OJ Simpson) isn’t there acting for Trump or Trump’s interests per se: he’s acting in accordance with the directions and perceived best interests of the underwriters behind the pile of insurance money that’s the first target of the plaintiffs to go after if and when they win this case.
Trump himself wants the amount of any settlement before any verdict to be completely covered by the common insured interest, that pile of insurance money, without resort to him personally. The idea of this motion - aimed as it is to suggest that any trial verdict in favor of the plaintiffs’ is going to be followed by a big messy unpredictable time-eating appeal process - is an effort to achieve Trump’s goal.
The real value of this motion to the watching public is that it means Petrocelli’s advice to his clients is that this is no mere nuisance claim, that instead this claim confronts each of them to being exposed to a very large money judgment award, that likely cannot be settled without Trump himself ponying up some serious money to contribute to the payout.
There’s also a kicker to the fact that this lawsuit is based on the laws of California & NY state that prohibit claims in the nature of what the plaintiffs are asking the jury to find: not just money from Trump, but actual condemnations of Trump personally and of companies associated with Donald J. Trump, and sanctions aimed at enforcing those condemnations by preventing Trump from certain classes of future behavior.
16 Likes
So, I called you prejudiced against me in my tramp U trial because I have called Mexican illegals rapists, murderers and drug dealers and you are an Hispanic, and that made headlines. Maybe you really weren’t prejudiced against me for saying those things and maybe not all Mexican illegals are rapists, murderers and drug dealers, but by now because of the crooked media you and most other people certainly are prejudiced against me for calling Mexican illegals rapists, murderers and drug dealers and none of any of that prejudice has any place in my trial. I deserve fair justice dispite the fact that I called you prejudiced against me because you are an Hispanic and called Mexican illegals rapists, murderers and drug dealers. You are all prejudiced! I’m not being treated fairly here! I’m the victim here!!!
10 Likes
So now he’s “asking” Judge Curiel?
1 Like
Yeah, this seems like a desperate attempt to do … something, although for the life of me I can’t figure out what it was.
Maybe the law firm got a look at his bank account and decided to put the senior partner’s idiot nephew on the case.
3 Likes