PRESIDENT-ELECT’S TRUMP UNIVERSITY CIVIL LAW SUIT IS STILL ON
…Judge Gonzalo
Curiel, that Trump had said was not qualified to deal with his law suit.
Lawyers have stated that the
parties were “miles apart” in previous settlement discussions.
The Trump
University fraud and racketeering class action case is currently
pending in a federal court in San Diego.
And it’s not looking so good for the new US President-Elect that had
once stated this judge could not perform his job because of his Hispanic
background, even though the judge was born and raised in Indiana.
Judge Gonzalo
Curiel today denied President-Elect Donald Trump’s motion for a blanket exclusion
of evidence statements Mr. Trump made during the presidential campaign.
Mr. Trump’s lawyers had argued that such statements were irrelevant
and could prejudice a jury. Lawyers for the classes of Trump University
students countered that the evidence is relevant to Mr. Trump’s credibility as
a witness.
Generally,
prior statements, though otherwise irrelevant to a pending matter, are
admissible to impeach a witness’s other testimony. Putting it
differently, if a witness testifies to “X,” and had previously stated “not X,”
then the jury will be permitted to hear the prior statements. As to Mr.
Trump, much of what was stated by Trump in his taped deposition are directly
the opposite of some of his statements made during the campaign.
Judge Curiel has
ruled that because Mr. Trump had failed to specify what specific statements he
wanted to exclude, the Court would rule separately on the admissibility of each
statement at trial.
The judge also
held that Mr. Trump’s lawyers could not tell the jury that Trump
University had a 98% approval rating from its former students. This ruling was because such ratings are
irrelevant to whether the Mr. Trump or his University deceived his
students.
Judge Curiel
did rule that Mr. Trump would be allowed to testify by videotape and need not
show up in person.
Under this
often-used procedure, the camera is generally focused close-up on the witness,
as his lawyers elicit direct testimony and the lawyers for the university class
of those who paid Trump University tuition cross-examine him. The
videotape will then be played by the jury, which is watched as if it is in a
movie theater.
It is the same
technology as is used in a videotaped deposition, except that it is taken
specifically for use at trial in front of the jury as though the witness were
there in person.
Please note,
this videotape is no advantage for Mr. Trump.
Such a big screen effect if anything magnifies a witness’s demeanor, and
the jury will then see every orange bead of sweat.
While he will
soon entertain a new motion to delay trial until January, Judge Curiel has
stated that he is not inclined to grant it. The new motion is based
on the argument that Mr. Trump will be busy during the transition of political
power to Mr. Trump. However, this has
asked the rhetorical question of whether Trump plans to not be busy after his
inauguration.
Thus, if the
case does not settle, the trial will now begin on November 28, with the
selection of a jury of nine from a pool of perhaps 100 to 200 potential
jurors. That process will likely take a
day or two, and then the trial begins.
Judge Curiel
has encouraged settlement talks. And significantly, Mr. Trump’s lawyer,
Daniel Petrocelli, has said “we are all
ears”. However, the university
class’s lawyer, Patrick Coughlin, has discouraged such hopes of resolution.
Coughlin has stated that the parties were “miles
apart” in previous settlement discussions.
Those are the
facts, and these sober, impartial rulings cannot give the President-Elect much
comfort.
It is doubted
that the trial will be postponed if any potential settlement efforts fail.
Just imagine
the prospective spectacle of a President-elect on trial, not a criminal trial,
but a civil trial. Trump is accused of
civil fraud and racketeering. Just imagine if he is held liable.
Please fasten
your seat belts.
Copyright G.Ater 2016



Comments
Post a Comment