ReportWire

Tag: Lewis A. Kaplan

  • Tearful Caroline Ellison gets 2 years in prison over her role in FTX fraud

    Tearful Caroline Ellison gets 2 years in prison over her role in FTX fraud

    NEW YORK (AP) — Caroline Ellison, a former top executive in Sam Bankman-Fried ’s fallen FTX cryptocurrency empire, was sentenced to two years in prison on Tuesday after she apologized to everyone hurt by a fraud that stole billions of dollars from investors, lenders and customers.

    Ellison, 29, could have faced a much tougher sentence, but both the judge and prosecutors said she deserved credit for talking extensively with federal investigators, pleading guilty and ultimately testifying against Bankman-Fried for three days at his trial last November.

    U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan said Ellison’s cooperation was “very, very substantial” and “remarkable.”

    But he said a prison sentence was necessary because she had participated in what might be the “greatest financial fraud ever perpetrated in this country and probably anywhere else” or at least close to it.

    Ellison was ordered to report to prison Nov. 7.

    FTX was one of the world’s most popular cryptocurrency exchanges, known for its Superbowl TV ad and its extensive lobbying campaign in Washington, before it collapsed in 2022.

    U.S. prosecutors accused Bankman-Fried and other top executives of looting customer accounts on the exchange to make risky investments, make millions of dollars of illegal political donations, bribe Chinese officials and buy luxury real estate in the Caribbean.

    Ellison was chief executive at Alameda Research, a cryptocurrency hedge fund controlled by Bankman-Fried.

    “I’m deeply ashamed with what I’ve done,” she said at the sentencing hearing, fighting through tears to say she was “so so sorry” to everyone she had harmed directly or indirectly.

    She did not speak as she left Manhattan federal court, surrounded by lawyers.

    In court Tuesday, Assistant U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon called for leniency, saying Ellison’s testimony was “devastating and powerful proof” against Bankman-Fried, 32, who was found guilty of fraud and sentenced to 25 years in prison.

    Attorney Anjan Sahni asked the judge to spare his client from prison, citing “unusual circumstances,” including her off-and-on romantic relationship with Bankman-Fried and the damage caused when her “whole professional and personal life came to revolve” around him.

    Judge Kaplan agreed that Ellison’s willingness to work with prosecutors was extraordinary.

    “I’ve seen a lot of cooperators in 30 years here. I’ve never seen one quite like Ms. Ellison,” he said.

    But he said that in such a serious case, he could not let cooperation be a get-out-of-jail-free card, even when it was clear that Bankman-Fried had become “your kryptonite.”

    Bankman-Fried also testified at the trial, portraying himself to the jury as inexperienced and bumbling but not a criminal. He acknowledged making mistakes, but said he didn’t defraud anyone and wasn’t aware that Alameda Research had amassed billions of dollars in debt.

    Sassoon, the prosecutor, described that testimony in court Tuesday as “evasive, even contemptuous.”

    As the business began to falter, Ellison divulged the massive fraud to employees who worked for her even before FTX filed for bankruptcy, trial evidence showed.

    Ultimately, she also spoke extensively with criminal and civil U.S. investigators.

    Sassoon said prosecutors were impressed that Ellison did not “jump into the lifeboat” to escape her crimes but instead spent nearly two years fully cooperating.

    Since testifying at Bankman-Fried’s trial, Ellison has engaged in extensive charity work, written a novel and worked with her parents on a math enrichment textbook for advanced high school students, according to her lawyers.

    They said she also now has a healthy romantic relationship and has reconnected with high school friends she had lost touch with while she worked for and sometimes dated Bankman-Fried from 2017 until late 2022.

    Source link

  • Prosecutors seek from 40 to 50 years in prison for Sam Bankman-Fried for cryptocurrency fraud

    Prosecutors seek from 40 to 50 years in prison for Sam Bankman-Fried for cryptocurrency fraud

    NEW YORK – FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried’s orchestration of one of history’s largest financial frauds in his quest to dominate the cryptocurrency world deserves a prison sentence of 40 to 50 years, federal prosecutors on Friday told a federal judge.

    Prosecutors made the recommendation in papers filed in Manhattan federal court in advance of a March 28 sentencing, where a judge will also consider a 100-year prison sentence recommended by the court’s probation officers and a request by defense lawyers for leniency and a term of imprisonment not to exceed single digits.

    Bankman-Fried, 32, was convicted in November on fraud and conspiracy charges after his dramatic fall from a year earlier when he and his companies seemed to be riding a crest of success that had resulted in a Super Bowl advertisement and celebrity endorsements from stars like quarterback Tom Brady and comedian Larry David.

    Some of his biggest successes, though, resulted from stealing at least $10 billion from investors and customers between 2017 and 2022 to buy luxury real estate, make risky investments, dispense outsized charitable donations and political contributions and to buy praise from celebrities, prosecutors said.

    “His life in recent years has been one of unmatched greed and hubris; of ambition and rationalization; and courting risk and gambling repeatedly with other people’s money. And even now Bankman-Fried refuses to admit what he did was wrong,” prosecutors wrote.

    “Having set himself on the goal of amassing endless wealth and unlimited power — to the point that he thought he might become President and the world’s first trillionaire — there was little Bankman-Fried did not do to achieve it,” prosecutors said.

    They said crimes reflecting a “brazen disrespect for the rule of law” had depleted the retirement funds and nest eggs of people who could least afford to lose money, including some in war-torn or financially insecure countries, and had harmed others who sought to “break generational poverty” only to be left “devastated” and “heartbroken.”

    “He knew what society deemed illegal and unethical, but disregarded that based on a pernicious megalomania guided by the defendant’s own values and sense of superiority,” prosecutors said.

    Bankman-Fried was extradited to the United States in December 2022 from the Bahamas after his companies collapsed a month earlier. Originally permitted to remain at home with his parents in Palo Alto, California, he was jailed last year weeks before his trial after Judge Lewis A. Kaplan concluded that he had tried to tamper with trial witnesses.

    In their presentence submission, prosecutors described Bankman-Fried’s crimes as “one of the largest financial frauds in history, and what is likely the largest fraud in the last decade.”

    “The defendant victimized tens of thousands of people and companies, across several continents, over a period of multiple years. He stole money from customers who entrusted it to him; he lied to investors; he sent fabricated documents to lenders; he pumped millions of dollars in illegal donations into our political system; and he bribed foreign officials. Each of these crimes is worthy of a lengthy sentence,” they wrote.

    They said his “unlawful political donations to over 300 politicians and political action groups, amounting to in excess of $100 million, is believed to be the largest-ever campaign finance offense.”

    And they said his $150 million in bribes to Chinese government officials was one of the single largest by an individual.

    “Even following FTX’s bankruptcy and his subsequent arrest, Bankman-Fried shirked responsibility, deflected blame to market events and other individuals, attempted to tamper with witnesses, and lied repeatedly under oath,” prosecutors said, citing his trial testimony.

    Two weeks ago, Bankman-Fried attorney Marc Mukasey attacked a probation office recommendation that their client serve 100 years in prison, saying a sentence of that length would be “grotesque” and “barbaric.”

    He urged the judge to sentence Bankman-Fried to just a few years behind bars after calculating federal sentencing guidelines to recommend a term of five to 6 1/2 years in prison.

    “Sam is not the ‘evil genius’ depicted in the media or the greedy villain described at trial,” Mukasey said, calling his client a “first-time, non-violent offender, who was joined in the conduct at issue by at least four other culpable individuals, in a matter where victims are poised to recover — were always poised to recover — a hundred cents on the dollar.”

    Mukasey said he will respond to the prosecutors’ claims in a filing next week.

    Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

    Larry Neumeister, Associated Press

    Source link

  • Jury rules Trump must pay E. Jean Carroll $83.3 million in damages for defamation

    Jury rules Trump must pay E. Jean Carroll $83.3 million in damages for defamation

    E. Jean Carroll and her attorneys Shawn Crowley and Roberta Kaplan react outside the Manhattan Federal Court, after the verdict in the second civil trial after she accused former U.S. President Donald Trump of raping her decades ago, in New York City, U.S., January 26, 2024. 

    Brendan Mcdermid | Reuters

    A federal jury on Friday said Donald Trump must pay E. Jean Carroll a total of $83.3 million in damages for defaming her in statements he made as president after the writer said he had raped her in a New York department store in the 1990s.

    The massive civil verdict — which comes on top of a $5 million sexual abuse and defamation verdict that Carroll won against Trump last year — was delivered less than three hours after the nine-member jury began deliberating in U.S. District Court in Manhattan.

    Trump was not in court for the reading of the unanimous verdict on compensatory and punitive damages by the anonymous jury at 4:40 p.m. ET.

    But shortly afterward, he said in a social media post that he would appeal it.

    “This is a great victory for every woman who stands up when she’s been knocked down, and a huge defeat for every bully who has tried to keep a woman down,” Carroll said in a statement.

    E. Jean Carroll hugs her team after the verdict was read during the second civil trial where Carroll accused former U.S. President Donald Trump of raping her decades ago, at Manhattan Federal Court in New York City, U.S., January 26, 2024, in this courtroom sketch. 

    Jane Rosenberg | Reuters

    Her attorney Roberta Kaplan said, “Today’s verdict proves that the law applies to everyone in our country, even the rich, even the famous, even former presidents. There is a way to stand up to someone like Donald Trump who cares more about wealth, fame, and power than respecting the law.”

    Jurors awarded Carroll $7.3 million for compensatory damages for emotional harm, and another $11 million for compensatory damages to her reputation. Compensatory damages are awarded for actual losses suffered by someone.

    They then awarded her another $65 million in punitive damages after finding that Trump in a June 21, 2019, statement about Carroll had “acted maliciously, out of hatred, ill will or spite, vindictively or out of wanton, reckless, or willful disregard of Ms. Carroll’s right.”

    Trump in those comments and others since then has denied ever meeting Carroll, suggested she made her claim to sell a book, and said she was not “my type.”

    Punitive damages are meant to punish wrongdoing by a defendant.

    Earlier Friday, Carroll’s lawyer in her closing argument had urged jurors to award her a “very large” amount of money, to make the billionaire former president “stop” slandering her.

    “He doesn’t care about the law or truth but does care about money, and your decision on punitive damages is the only hope that he stops,” Kaplan said.

    Former U.S. President Donald Trump gestures to his supporters, as he departs for his second civil trial after E. Jean Carroll accused Trump of raping her decades ago, outside a Trump Tower in the Manhattan borough of New York City, U.S., January 26, 2024. 

    Eduardo Munoz | Reuters

    “How much will it take to make him stop? You cost him lots and lots of money,” she said.

    Trump in a social media post on his TruthSocial site after the verdict wrote, “Absolutely ridiculous!”

    “I fully disagree with both verdicts, and will be appealing this whole Biden Directed Witch Hunt focused on me and the Republican Party,” wrote Trump, who is the frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination.

    “Our Legal System is out of control, and being used as a Political Weapon. They have taken away all First Amendment Rights. THIS IS NOT AMERICA!”

    Trump so far has not received much help from appeals courts in challenging the two separate lawsuits by Carroll before they went to trial.

    But it is possible that on appeal of the verdicts he could at least win a reduction in the amount of money he owes her.

    Last month, the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals rejected Trump’s argument that he was immune from damages in the current case because he was president at the time he defamed Carroll.

    The appeals court ruled that Trump had waived the potential defense of presidential immunity for not raising it for years after Carroll first sued him in 2019.

    Trump last year posted $5.6 million as security while he appeals the verdict in the prior sex abuse and defamation case.

    When he appeals the current case’s verdict, he will likely have to post more than $90 million in security.

    Until the appeals are resolved, Carroll will not collect any money from Trump.

    Former U.S. President Donald Trump walks out during attorney Roberta Kaplan’s closing argument, during E. Jean Carroll’s second civil trial as Carroll accused Trump of raping her decades ago, at Manhattan Federal Court in New York City, U.S., January 26, 2024, in this courtroom sketch.

    Jane Rosenberg | Reuters

    Judge Lewis Kaplan, who is not related to Roberta, told jurors before dismissing them from court: “My advice to you is that you never disclose that you were on this jury, and I won’t say anything more about it.”

    Before their deliberations began, Judge Kaplan instructed them that they had to accept as facts that Trump “sexually assaulted” Carroll in the mid-1990s and defamed the writer in 2019.

    “What remains for you to decide,” the judge said, is whether “Mr. Trump acted maliciously when he made his two statements” about Carroll.

    “You must accept as true the facts as I explained to you as they have already been decided,” the judge said, referring to Trump’s sexual assault of Carroll and his slandering of her decades later.

    Trump looked on during the instructions with a frown.

    Earlier, Trump stalked out of the courtroom after Carroll’s lawyer began her closing argument, in which she urged jurors to award monetary damages “large enough that it will finally make him stop” slandering the writer.

    Trump’s dramatic departure came minutes after the judge warned his lawyer Alina Habba that she was risking being tossed into jail before summations began in the case.

    “The record will reflect that Mr. Trump just rose and walked out of the courtroom,” the judge said.

    Trump returned about an hour later, after Carroll’s attorney finished her summation and just before his attorney began her closing argument.

    Former U.S. President Donald Trump looks on as his attorney Alina Habba, delivers closing arguments during E. Jean Carroll’s second civil trial as Carroll accused Trump of raping her decades ago, at Manhattan Federal Court in New York City, U.S., January 26, 2024, in this courtroom sketch. 

    Jane Rosenberg | Reuters

    Carroll in a 2019 New York magazine article wrote that in the mid-1990s, Trump had raped her in a dressing room at Bergdorf Goodman department store on Fifth Avenue, just up the street from the Trump Tower, where he lived and worked.

    Trump denied her allegation at the time, saying she had made it up.

    Another Manhattan federal court jury last year found he had sexually abused Carroll in the attack and had defamed her in statements he made in late 2022 denying her claims.

    Kaplan ruled later in 2023 that that jury’s verdict meant that jurors in the current trial would have to accept as legally established that Trump had sexually assaulted Carroll and had defamed her in his 2022 statements.

    Trump on Friday posted several social media messages attacking Kaplan for rulings in the case, accusing the judge of having “absolute hatred of Donald J. Trump (ME!).” Trump’s Truth social account posted 14 times about Carroll when he was in the courtroom.

    In her closing argument, Carroll’s lawyer Kaplan asked jurors to impose punitive damages on Trump for refusing to stop defaming Carroll even after a jury last year held him liable for doing so and ordered him to pay her $5 million.

    Trump’s comments have sparked death threats and vicious emails and tweets directed at Carroll, the lawyer said.

    Read more CNBC politics coverage

    “The dollar amount has to be very large,” Roberta Kaplan said. “It is at least as much and probably much more than the $12 million” that the lawyer noted an expert witness had testified it could cost to repair Carroll’s reputation after Trump accused her of inventing her claim.

    “Last trial, Donald J. Trump didn’t even bother to show up, but this trial where it is about damages he has been sure to be here and the one thing he cares about his money,” Kaplan said.

    Trump “is worth billions of dollars, he said that under oath, he could pay a million dollars a day for 10 years and still have money in the bank,” Kaplan said.

    “When you begin deliberations I encourage you to step back and think of bigger picture, a former president of the United States who sexually assaulted, defamed and continues to defame.”

    Earlier, Trump’s lawyer Habba, who had already irked Judge Kaplan for showing up late in court, angered him when she persisted in arguing that defense lawyers should be able to show a slide to jurors during their summation that represented some tweets related to Carroll.

    “You are not going to use a slide to represent how many tweets there were, you are not using that slide, period,” Judge Kaplan said.

    When Habba said, “I need to make a record,” referring to putting her argument on the record, the judge issued his warning.

    “You are on the verge of spending time in the lockup, now sit down!” the judge told Habba.

    Kaplan snapped at Habba several more times during her closing argument, at one point telling her that if she continued pressing a particular point “there will be consequences.”

    Former U.S. President Donald Trump’s attorney Alina Habba delivers closing arguments during E. Jean Carroll’s second civil trial, as Carroll accused Trump of raping her decades ago, at Manhattan Federal Court in New York City, U.S., January 26, 2024 in this courtroom sketch.

    Jane Rosenberg | Reuters

    In her summation, Habba said that Carroll “has failed to show she is entitled to any damages at all.”

    “It is Ms. Carroll’s burden, not President Trump’s, to prove that his statements caused harm, and she failed to meet that burden, it is common sense,” Habba said.

    The attorney also suggested that Carroll had made up her claims of receiving “thousands of threats.”

    Carroll had testified that she deleted most of those threats, making them unavailable as evidence.

    “Either Ms. Carroll is lying to you and those messages never existed in the first place or she deleted them and wants you to rely on them, and guess what, they are not here, and she has to give them to you to support her claim for damages, and that is a fact,” Habba said.

    Habba also said that not only did Carroll “not suffer any emotional harm” after publishing her claim in 2019 about Trump raping her, “she was happier than ever.”

    “She told Vanity Fair [magazine] that the support she received walking down the streets was heartwarming,” Habba said. “One of the most carefree and happy times of her life, that she was in a cocoon of love … does this sound like someone whose world has come crashing down, who can’t sleep?”

    “She was enjoying the newfound attention she was receiving,” the lawyer said.

    Before the arguments began and jurors entered the courtroom, the judge issued a warning.

    “During closing arguments, no one is to say anything other than opposing counsel,” said Kaplan. “There are to be no interruptions or audible comments by anyone else and that will apply when I charge the jury and that will apply to counsel then as well.”

    Carroll’s lawyers have complained during the trial about Trump making comments that were audible to jurors while sitting with his attorneys at the defense table.

    Kaplan previously ruled that because of the prior verdict, there was no legal question that Trump defamed Carroll. That ruling left only the question of monetary damages remaining for the jury.

    Trump during his very brief testimony in the trial Thursday said of Carroll’s claim, “I consider it a false accusation.”

    Kaplan struck that testimony, in light of the prior jury’s verdict which found he had sexually abused Carroll.

    Trump earlier this week defeated former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley in the Republican presidential primary in New Hampshire. Last week, he won the Iowa GOP caucuses.

    Source link

  • Here’s what Sam Bankman Fried said in his first full day on the stand in his $8 billion fraud trial

    Here’s what Sam Bankman Fried said in his first full day on the stand in his $8 billion fraud trial

    Former FTX Chief Executive Sam Bankman-Fried, who faces fraud charges over the collapse of the bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange, walks outside the Manhattan federal court in New York City, U.S. March 30, 2023. 

    Amanda Perobelli | Reuters

    FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried told jurors in his criminal trial on Friday that he didn’t commit fraud, and that he thought the crypto exchange’s outside expenditures, like paying for the naming rights at a sports arena, came out of company profits.

    On Friday morning, defense attorney Mark Cohen asked Bankman-Fried if he defrauded anyone.

    “No, I did not,” Bankman-Fried responded.

    Cohen followed by asking if he took customer funds, to which Bankman-Fried said “no.”

    Bankman-Fried, 31, faces seven criminal counts, including wire fraud, securities fraud and money laundering, that could land him in prison for life if he’s convicted. Bankman-Fried, the son of two Stanford legal scholars, has pleaded not guilty in the case.

    Prior to the defendant’s appearance on the stand, the four-week trial was highlighted by the testimony of multiple members of FTX’s top leadership team as well as the people who ran sister hedge fund Alameda Research. They all singled out Bankman-Fried as the mastermind of a scheme to use FTX customer money to fund everything from venture investments and a high-priced condo in the Bahamas to covering Alameda’s crypto losses.

    Courtroom sketch showing Sam Bankman Fried questioned by his attorney Mark Cohen. Judge Lewis Kaplan on the bench

    Artist: Elizabeth Williams

    Prosecutors walked former leaders of Bankman-Fried’s businesses through specific actions taken by their boss that resulted in clients losing billions of dollars last year. Several of the witnesses, including Bankman-Fried’s ex-girlfriend Caroline Ellison, who ran Alameda, have pleaded guilty to multiple charges and are cooperating with the government.

    ‘Significant oversights’

    On Friday, Bankman-Fried acknowledged that one of his biggest mistakes was not having a risk management team. That led to “significant oversights,” he said.

    At the start of his testimony, Cohen walked Bankman-Fried through his background and how he got into crypto. The defendant said he studied physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and graduated in 2014. He then worked as a trader on the international desk at Jane Street for over three years, managing tens of billions of dollars a day in trading. That’s where he learned the fundamentals of things like arbitrage trading.

    In the fall of 2017, Bankman-Fried founded Alameda Research.

    “This was when crypto was starting to become publicly visible for the first time,” Bankman-Fried testified.

    He said people were excited about it, watching bitcoin, which had jumped from $1,000 to $10,000 in a two-month period. Banks and brokers weren’t involved yet and it seemed like there would probably be big demand for an arbitrage provider, he said.

    “I had absolutely no idea” how cryptocurrencies worked, Bankman-Fried said. “I just knew they were things you could trade.”

    The first Alameda office was in an Airbnb in Berkeley, California, he said. It was listed as a two bedroom but they used the couch in the living room as a third bed and also repurposed the attic as a fourth bedroom.

    He started FTX in 2019. Trading volume grew substantially on FTX from a few million dollars a day to tens of millions of dollars that year to hundreds of millions of dollars in 2020. By 2022, that number was up to $10 billion to $15 billion per day in trading volume, he said.

    Bankman-Fried said Alameda was permitted to borrow from FTX, but his understanding was that the money was coming from margin trades, collateral from other margin trades or assets earning interest on the platform.

    At FTX, there were no general restrictions on what could be done with funds that were borrowed as long as the company believed assets were greater than liabilities, Bankman-Fried testified.

    In 2020, a routine liquidation gone wrong led to some of the special borrowing permissions at Alameda, he said. The risk engine was sagging under the weight of growth. A liquidation that should have been in the thousands of dollars was in the trillions of dollars. Alameda was suddenly underwater because of closing the position.

    The incident exposed a larger concern, that the potential of an erroneous liquidation of Alameda could be disastrous for users.

    Bankman-Fried said he talked to FTX’s engineering director Nishad Singh and co-founder Gary Wang, both of whom testified earlier on behalf of the prosecution. He suggested creating an alert, which would prompt the user to deposit more collateral, or a delay, Bankman-Fried said. In response to this feedback, Singh and Wang told Bankman-Fried they had implemented a feature like that, he said, adding that he later learned it was the “allow negative” feature.

    Bankman-Fried testified that he wasn’t aware of the amount Alameda was borrowing or its theoretical max. As long as Alameda’s net asset value was positive and the scale of borrowing was reasonable, increasing its line of credit from so that Alameda could keep filling orders was fine, he said. Earlier testimony from Singh and Wang suggested the line of credit was raised to $65 billion, a number Bankman-Fried said he was not aware of.

    Tough sell

    Convincing the jury will be a tall order for Bankman-Fried after a mountain of damning evidence was presented by the government.

    Prosecutors entered corroborating materials, including encrypted Signal messages and other internal documents that appear to show Bankman-Fried orchestrating the spending of FTX customer money.

    The defense’s case, which consists of Bankman-Fried’s testimony along with that of two witnesses who took the stand Thursday morning, hinges largely on whether the jury believes the defendant didn’t intend to commit fraud.

    The logo of FTX is seen on a flag at the entrance of the FTX Arena in Miami, Florida, November 12, 2022.

    Marco Bello | Reuters

    In Friday afternoon testimony, Bankman-Fried was asked about FTX’s marketing and promotions.

    He said there were 15 people on the marketing team, and noted that he got more involved with it as time progressed. In particular, he discussed the naming rights in 2021 for the basketball arena in Miami, which was to be a 19-year deal for $135 million.

    Bankman-Fried said the sponsorship of FTX Arena would deliver returns for the company and create wide brand awareness because even he, as an “average level sports fan,” could name dozens of stadiums. He said the investment would be about $10 million a year, or 1% of revenue. The company had been deciding among a few different stadiums, including the homes to the NFL’s New Orleans Saints and Kansas City Chiefs, Bankman-Fried said.

    A crucial part of his testimony came when Bankman-Fried said he thought the stadium deal funding was coming from revenue from the exchange and returns from venture investments, as opposed to customer money.

    Similarly, Bankman-Fried testified that he believed the lavish Bahamas properties were being paid for with FTX operating cash that came from revenue and venture investments. He said having available property to rent was a necessary incentive if the company wanted to poach developers from Facebook and Google.

    As for the venture investments, Bankman-Fried said he thought that money was coming from Alameda’s operating profits and third-party lending desks. Alameda’s venture arm was renamed Clifton Bay Investments, which Bankman-Fried said was a first step in building a dedicated venture brand.

    When asked about loans he took from the business, Bankman-Fried said they were to pay for venture investments and political donations. He said that, as the primary owner of Alameda, he thought he had a few billion dollars in arbitrage profit from the past few years and there was no reason he couldn’t borrow from it. He said the loans, except for the most recent one prior to the firm’s bankruptcy filing, were all documented through promissory notes.

    Bankman-Fried said he never directed Singh or former FTX executive Ryan Salame to make political donations. Salame pleaded guilty in September to federal campaign finance and money-transmitting crimes, admitting that from fall 2021 to November 2022, he steered tens of millions of dollars of political contributions to both Democrats and Republicans in his own name when the money actually came from Alameda.

    Bankman-Fried, who allegedly used FTX customer funds to help finance over $100 million in political giving during the 2022 midterms, testified that he talked to politicians about pandemic prevention and crypto regulation. He said he had a vested interested in crypto policy even though FTX’s U.S. operation was relatively small, because the company was seeking to offer crypto futures products in the U.S.

    Bankman-Fried then discussed his public persona. He said he hadn’t intended to be the public face of the company because he’s “naturally introverted.” But a few interviews went well, and it snowballed from there. He said he was the only person at the company that the press sought.

    He wore T-shirts and shorts because they were comfortable and said he let his hair grow out because he was busy and lazy.

    Bankman-Fried was photographed at the 2022 Super Bowl in Los Angeles with Katy Perry. He told the jury, which was previously presented with the photo by the prosecution, that he thought it was natural to go to the game because he was in town for meetings and the company had a commercial running.

    “I thought maybe it would be interesting,” he said.

    Shifting blame to his ex-girlfriend

    The afternoon testimony largely focused on Bankman-Fried’s repeated and unsuccessful request to Ellison that she hedge Alameda’s risk. Bankman-Fried said in late 2021, he had talked to Ellison about putting on trades to protect against the risk of market moves since Alameda had been leveraged long, meaning they would lose money if the market went down.

    Ellison said she would look into it, which Bankman-Fried said he “interpreted” as her being “far less enthusiastic about it.” Over the course of 2022, Bankman-Fried said every two months he would check in to see if Alameda had hedged, and each time he was told not yet, but Ellison would say she was planning to do so in the near future.

    Specifically, Bankman-Fried said he had talked with Ellison and Ramnik Arora, who had been the head of product at FTX, about putting a $2 billion hedge on the company’s investment in Genesis Digital Assets, a bitcoin miner. He told the jury that the hedge was never made.

    There was also more detail on how Bankman-Fried was told about FTX’s $8 billion liability. According to the defendant, in October 2022, developers built a Google database that included financial data. That’s where Bankman-Fried noticed the negative $8 billion balance, which he said he was “very surprised” to see.

    Cohen then brought the jury through the summer months of 2022, a time when Alameda’s lenders, specifically Genesis, BlockFi, Celsius and Voyager, all had direct conversations with Bankman-Fried about the need for emergency capital. In the end, only BlockFi and Voyager received funds from Alameda and Bankman-Fried.

    In late 2021 and early 2022, Bankman-Fried said he wanted FTX revenue to be above $1 billion because it was a round number. He asked company executives if there were ways to reach that mark. Singh said he’d dealt with it by staking the company’s investment in crypto token Serum, a way of putting the coins to work. That had added another $50 million in revenue. Bankman-Fried testified that he was “a little surprised” they found that additional money, but it got him to $1 billion.

    — CNBC’s Dawn Giel contributed to this report

    WATCH: Sam Bankman-Fried testifying in his criminal case

    Sam Bankman-Fried set to testify at fraud trial in what experts deem a major gamble for the case

    Source link

  • Trump suffers big loss in E. Jean Carroll defamation case, judge says he’s liable

    Trump suffers big loss in E. Jean Carroll defamation case, judge says he’s liable

    E. Jean Carroll, who accused former President Donald Trump of rape, arrives at Manhattan Federal Court for the continuation of the civil case, in New York City, May 9, 2023.

    Brendan McDermid | Reuters

    A federal judge on Wednesday ruled that Donald Trump is civilly liable for defamatory statements he made about writer E. Jean Carroll in 2019 when she went public with claims he had raped her decades earlier.

    Judge Lewis Kaplan, as part of that ruling, said the upcoming trial for Carroll’s lawsuit against Trump will only deal with the question of how much the former president should pay her in monetary damages for defaming her.

    Normally, a jury would determine at trial whether a defendant is liable for civil damages claimed by a plaintiff.

    But Kaplan found that Carroll was entitled to a partial summary judgment on the question of Trump’s liability in the case.

    He cited the fact that jurors at a trial in a separate but related lawsuit in May found that Trump sexually abused Carroll in a New York department store in the mid-1990s, and defamed her in statements he made when he denied her allegation last fall.

    Carroll’s lawyers argued, and Kaplan agreed, that the jury’s verdict in that case effectively settled the legal question of whether Trump had defamed her in similar comments he made about Carroll in 2019.

    “The truth or falsity of Mr. Trump’s 2019 statements therefore depends — like the truth or falsity of his 2022 statement — on whether Ms. Carroll lied about Mr. Trump sexually assaulting her,” Kaplan wrote in his 25-page decision in U.S. District Court in Manhattan.

    “The jury’s finding that she did not therefore is binding in this case and precludes Mr. Trump from contesting the falsity of his 2019 statements,” Kaplan wrote.

    The ruling is the latest in a series of big losses for Trump in lawsuits filed by Carroll.

    CNBC Politics

    Read more of CNBC’s politics coverage:

    At the trial that ended in May, Trump was ordered to pay Carroll $5 million in damages for the comments he made after he was president. Trump is appealing the verdict and damages in that case.

    The suit that was the subject of Kaplan’s ruling Wednesday relates to statements about Carroll that Trump made when he was president as he denied her claim of rape.

    Trial in that case is set to begin Jan. 15, just as the Republican presidential nomination contest is set to heat up with primaries and caucuses. Trump is the front-runner in the contest for the 2024 GOP nomination.

    Carroll’s lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, who is not related to the judge, in a statement, said, “We look forward to trial limited to damages for the original defamatory statements Donald Trump made about our client E Jean Carroll in 2019.”

    Trump’s lawyer, Alina Habba, said, “We remain very confident that the Carroll II verdict will be overturned on appeal which will render this decision moot.”

    “Carroll II” is the shorthand name for Carroll’s second lawsuit, which was the subject of the trial that ended in May.

    Habba said she believes that a federal appeals court in New York will block the upcoming trial in Carroll’s first lawsuit from starting as scheduled “as it considers the meritorious defenses that have been raised by President Trump.”

    Trump is appealing Judge Kaplan’s dismissal of his own claim that Carroll defamed the former president when she reiterated her claim that Trump had raped her. Trump’s argument is based on the fact that jurors at the trial in May had not found that he raped Carroll, but had instead sexually abused her.

    Judge Kaplan, in an August ruling, brushed aside Trump’s argument, saying that the jury’s finding that Trump had “deliberately and forcibly” penetrated Carroll is consistent with the common use of the term rape, if not the technical definition under New York law.

    A month earlier, the Department of Justice dropped its nearly three-year-long effort to shield Trump from civil liability in the suit related to comments he made about Carroll as president. The DOJ had argued that Trump was acting within the scope of his office as president when he made the statements about Carroll.

    In dropping that argument, the DOJ cited a decision by the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., which suggested Trump could be personally sued if his statements did not have the purpose of serving the U.S. government.

    The department also noted that Trump’s allegedly defamatory statements about Carroll continued after he left the White House in early 2021 and that those statements are included in an amended suit Carroll filed against him last month.

    Source link

  • Trump lawyers will not offer witnesses at E. Jean Carroll rape defamation trial

    Trump lawyers will not offer witnesses at E. Jean Carroll rape defamation trial

    Joe Tacopina, lawyer of former U.S. President Donald Trump, questions former Elle magazine advice columnist E. Jean Carroll before U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan as Carroll’s deposition plays on a monitor, during a civil trial where Carroll accuses the former U.S. president in a civil lawsuit of raping her in a department store dressing room in the mid-1990s, and of defamation, in New York, May 1, 2023 in this courtroom sketch.

    Jane Rosenberg | Reuters

    A lawyer for former President Donald Trump said Wednesday said he will not present any witnesses at his civil trial for a lawsuit accusing him of raping the writer E. Jean Carroll in the mid-1990s and defaming her last fall when he again denied her claim.

    Trump’s attorney Joseph Tacopina told Judge Lewis Kaplan that the one expert witness he planned to call to the witness stand is unable to testify due to a health issue.

    On Tuesday, Tacopina said the 76-year-old Trump would not testify before the jury in U.S. District Court in Manhattan. Trump has not appeared in that court since the trial began last week.

    But the presumptive frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination was in Scotland on Monday to break ground for a new golf course.

    CNBC Politics

    Read more of CNBC’s politics coverage:

    A videotape of Trump’s deposition for the case might be played later Wednesday for jurors.

    That tape includes footage from the so-called “Access Hollywood” tape, in which Trump bragged to that show’s then-host Billy Bush about groping and kissing women without their consent.

    “I’m automatically attracted to beautiful women — I just start kissing them, it’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait,” Trump says on that tape, recorded in 2005 when he was taping a segment of the television show “Access Hollywood.”

    “And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. “Grab ’em by the p—-,” Trump said.

    Carroll’s sister, Cande Carroll, was due to take the witness stand, followed by Natasha Stoynoff, who claims Trump assaulted her at his Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, in 2005.  

    Kaplan told jurors Wednesday that they will start deliberations in the case next week.

    Carroll’s lawyers expect to rest their case on Thursday.

    Carroll, 79, alleges that Trump raped her in a dressing room of the Bergdorf Goodman department store in Manhattan after a chance encounter with him there.

    He has denied raping her, or even being in the store with her that date. Trump has also said he would not have even had consensual sex with her because she was not his “type.”

    However, during questioning under oath by Carroll’s lawyer for his deposition, Trump mistook Carroll for his former wife Marla Maples in a photo that shows Carroll and her then-husband John Johnson with Trump and his then-wife Ivana Trump.

    From L-R: Donald Trump, E. Jean Carroll, John Johnson and Ivana Trump at an NBC party, late 1980s.

    Source: U.S. District Court in Manhattan

    Carroll’s lawsuit claims battery by Trump for the alleged rape.

    The criminal statute of limitations for rape has long passed, but a recently enacted New York state law allows adults alleging sexual misconduct to file civil claims within a one-year window if those claims otherwise are barred by the statute of limitations.

    Source link

  • Judge unseals section of Trump deposition in rape-defamation lawsuit by writer E. Jean Carroll

    Judge unseals section of Trump deposition in rape-defamation lawsuit by writer E. Jean Carroll

    Editor’s note: This story includes a description of sexual assault.

    A federal judge in New York on Friday rejected an effort by lawyers for former President Donald Trump to keep sealed a portion of the transcript of his deposition in a lawsuit by a writer who accuses him of raping her in the mid-1990s.

    Trump’s arguments for keeping the nearly three dozen pages of his deposition sealed “are entirely baseless,” Judge Lewis Kaplan wrote in his order in U.S. District Court in Manhattan.

    That deposition showed Trump making insulting comments about the writer who is suing him, E. Jean Carroll, her lawyer, and President Joe Biden, as well as grousing about what he called a series of “hoaxes” involving allegedly false claims made about him.

    The deposition which was conducted on Oct. 19 by lawyers for Carroll at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida.

    Earlier Friday, Kaplan denied Trump’s bid to toss out one of the two lawsuits filed against him by Carroll, who says Trump raped her in a dressing room in the Bergdorf Goodman department store in Manhattan more than two decades ago.

    In his unsealing order, Kaplan said that Trump had no right to confidentiality for his testimony when he gave it. The judge noted that there is a presumptive right held by the public to court documents.

    The judge added that contrary to Trump’s argument, the portion of his transcript that was redacted in the public filing by Carroll’s lawyers “was directly relevant” to a disagreement between those attorneys and his over whether additional discovery should be conducted for her second lawsuit.

    Kaplan first ordered the transcript unsealed on Monday. But he then reversed his order after Trump’s lawyers asked him for three days to file arguments opposing the unsealing.

    Trump, while serving as president, publicly accused Carroll of making up the rape allegation, saying she was motivated by politics and a desire to sell a book containing her claims.

    Carroll then sued him for defamation.

    She sued him again in November when he made what she says were other defamatory statements about her in a social media post that Trump wrote in October. Her second lawsuit also alleges battery, a claim that was allowed under a new New York state law that allows adults a one-year grace period to file lawsuits alleging sexual abuse that occurred outside of the time frame allowed by the statute of limitations.

    Trial in the cases has been set for April.

    “It’s a false accusation,” Trump said in his deposition, according to the newly disclosed transcript. “Never happened, never would happen.”

    “I will sue her after this is over, and that’s the thing I really look forward to doing,” Trump told Carroll’s lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, who is not related to the judge.

    “And I’ll sue you too.”

    Trump during the deposition was asked about the Oct. 12 post he made on his social media site, which refers to the “Ms. Bergdorf Goodman case,” calling it “a complete con job.”

    The post referenced a June 2019 interview Carroll gave CNN’s Anderson Cooper that described her account of the alleged sexual assault. She said it occurred after a chance meeting with Trump while she was shopping, and he allegedly asked her for help buying a present “for a girl.”

    “She completely made up a story that I met her at the doors of this crowded New York City department store and within minutes ‘swooned’ her,” Trump had written, Kaplan noted in her questioning.

    Trump in his deposition confirmed Kaplan had read that, and the rest of the post accurately, saying, “Great statement, yeah. True. True.”

    “I wrote it all myself,” he added.

    Asked if he had talked to anyone about what to say in his post, Trump replied, “No, I didn’t need to. I’m not Joe Biden.”

    Trump called Carroll a “wack job” during his deposition.

    “I think she’s sick, mentally sick,” he said.

    Kaplan then asked him about his use of the word “swooned,” which she called “a strange word.”

    “What does ‘swooned her’ mean?” the attorney asked.

    Trump replied, “That would be a word, maybe accurate or not, having to do with talking to her and talking her — to do an act that she said happened, which didn’t happen.”

    “And it’s a nicer word than the word that starts with an F, and this would be a word that I used because I thought it would be inappropriate to use the other word,” Trump said. “And it didn’t happen.”

    When Kaplan said that the dictionary defined “swooned” as “to faint with extreme emotion,” Trump replied, “Well, sort of that’s what she said I did to her.”

    “She fainted with great emotion,” Trump said. “She actually indicated that she loved it. OK?,” he said, referring to Carroll’s CNN interview.

    “She loved it until commercial break,” Trump said. “In fact, I think she said it was sexy, didn’t she? She said it was very sexy to be raped. Didn’t she say that?”

    Kaplan then asked if Trump was testifying that Carroll “said that she loved being sexually assaulted by you.”

    Trump answered: “Well, based on her interview with Anderson Cooper, I believe that’s what took place. And we can define that. You’ll have to show that. I’m sure you’re going to show that. But she was interviewed by Anderson Cooper, and I think she said that rape was sexy — which it’s not, by the way.”

    He added, “But I think she said that rape was sexy.”

    In fact, Carroll had said in that interview that she believed “most people” thought of rape as “sexy.” She did not say she believed that herself.

    In that interview, Carroll said she was “panicked” when Trump shut the door of the dressing room and pushed her against a wall and began kissing her before pulling down her tights.

    “And it was against my will. And it hurt. And it was a fight,” Carroll said in the interview.

    She later said in the same interview, “I was not thrown on the ground and ravished. Which the word ‘rape’ carries so many sexual connotations.”

    “This was not — this was not sexual. It just hurt,” Carroll said.

    Cooper responded, “I think most people think of rape as … a violent assault.”

    Carroll then said, “I think most people think of rape as being sexy.”

    When her lawyer Kaplan asked Trump if it was not true that Carroll had said it was a view of many other people about rape being sexy, he said, “Oh, I don’t know … All I know is, I believe she said rape is sexy or something to that effect, but you’ll have to watch the interview. It’s been a while.”

    Trump later in the deposition noted that in his social media post he made what he called the “not politically correct statement” about Carroll.

    “She’s not my type,” Trump told Kaplan. “She is not a woman I would ever be attracted to,” he added later.

    “She’s accusing me of rape, a woman I have no idea who she is,” Trump said. “The worst thing you can do, the worst charge.”

    “And you know it’s not true too,” he told Kaplan. “You’re a political operative too. You’re a disgrace.”

    He later suggested that Kaplan had some kind of influence with the judge in the case to get him to grant her permission to depose him for the lawsuit. It is standard in lawsuits for attorneys to depose the parties in a case.

    “I knew that we’d be wasting a day doing this, a whole day doing this,” Trump said. “You’ve got to be connected to get this kind of time. But a whole day of doing this stuff on something that never happened.”

    Kaplan noted that Trump had said in his social media post that Carroll’s allegation was “a hoax and a lie, just like all the other hoaxes that have been played on me for the past seven years.”

    When the lawyer asked if he meant Carroll had fabricated her claim, Trump said, “Totally, 100 percent.” He admitted that he used the term “hoax” a lot.

    “I’ve had a lot of hoaxes played on me. This is one of them,” Trump said.

    Asked what some of those were, Trump said, “The Russia Russia Russia hoax … Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine hoax.”

    He pointed to special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into potential connections between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia.

    Trump also said the use of mail ballots during the 2020 election, which he lost to Biden, was a hoax.

    “I think they’re very dishonest. Mail-in ballots, very dishonest,” Trump said.

    Asked by Kaplan if he had himself voted by mail, Trump answered over the objections of his own lawyer, Alina Habba.

    “I do. I do,” Trump said. “Sometimes I do. But I don’t know what happens to it once you give it. I have no idea.”

    Source link

  • Writer who accused Trump of 1990s rape files new lawsuit

    Writer who accused Trump of 1990s rape files new lawsuit

    NEW YORK — A writer who accused former President Donald Trump of rape filed an upgraded lawsuit against him Thursday in New York, minutes after a new state law took effect allowing victims of sexual violence to sue over attacks that occurred decades ago.

    E. Jean Carroll’s lawyer filed the legal papers electronically as the Adult Survivor’s Act temporarily lifted the state’s usual deadlines for suing over sexual assault. She sought unspecified compensatory and punitive damages for pain and suffering, psychological harms, dignity loss and reputation damage.

    Carroll, a longtime advice columnist for Elle magazine, first made the claim in a 2019 book, saying Trump raped her in the dressing room of a Manhattan luxury department store in 1995 or 1996.

    Trump responded to the book’s allegations by saying it could never have happened because Carroll was “not my type.”

    His remarks led Carroll to file a defamation lawsuit against him, but that lawsuit has been tied up in appeals courts as judges decide whether he is protected from legal claims for comments made while he was president.

    Previously, Carroll had been barred by state law from suing over the alleged rape because too many years had passed since the incident.

    New York’s new law, however, gives sex crime victims who missed deadlines associated with statute of limitations a second chance to file a lawsuit. A window for such suits will open for one year, after which the usual time limits will be reinstated.

    At least hundreds of lawsuits are expected, including many filed by women who say they were assaulted by co-workers, prison guards, medical providers or others.

    In her new claims, Carroll maintains that Trump committed battery “when he forcibly raped and groped her” and that he defamed her when he denied raping her last month.

    Trump said in his statement that Carroll “completely made up a story that I met her at the doors of this crowded New York City Department Store and, within minutes, ‘swooned’ her. It is a Hoax and a lie, just like all the other Hoaxes that have been played on me for the past seven years.”

    Carroll’s new ability to sue Trump for rape could help her sidestep a potentially fatal legal flaw in her original defamation case.

    If the courts ultimately hold that Trump’s original disparaging comments about Carroll’s rape allegation were part of his job duties, as president, she would be barred from suing him over those remarks, as federal employees are protected from defamation claims. No such protection would cover things he did prior to becoming president.

    Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, who presides over the defamation lawsuit Carroll filed three years ago, may decide to include the new claims in a trial likely to occur in the spring.

    Trump’s current lawyers said this week that they do not yet know whether they will represent him against the new allegations.

    Carroll’s attorney, Roberta Kaplan, who is not related to the judge, said at a court hearing this week that the new claims should not require much additional gathering of evidence. She already put a copy of the new claims in the original case file last week. Trump and Carroll also have already been deposed.

    In a statement regarding the new lawsuit, Kaplan said her client “intends to hold Donald Trump accountable not only for defaming her, but also for sexually assaulting her, which he did years ago in a dressing room at Bergdorf Goodman.”

    “Thanksgiving Day was the very first day Ms. Carroll could file under New York law so our complaint was filed with the court shortly after midnight,” she added.

    Attorney Michael Madaio, a lawyer for Trump, said at the hearing that the new allegations are significantly different than the original defamation lawsuit and would require “an entirely new set” of evidence gathering.

    A lawyer for Trump did not respond to a message seeking comment on Wednesday. Another message seeking comment was sent to the lawyer after the lawsuit was filed less than 10 minutes into the new day.

    Source link

  • Trump angrily lashes out after his deposition is ordered

    Trump angrily lashes out after his deposition is ordered

    NEW YORK — Former President Donald Trump angrily lashed out Wednesday, calling the nation’s legal system a “broken disgrace” after a judge ruled he must answer questions under oath next week in a defamation lawsuit lodged by a writer who says he raped her in the mid-1990s.

    He also called the 2019 lawsuit by E. Jean Carroll, a longtime advice columnist for Elle magazine, “a hoax and a lie.”

    The outburst late in the day came hours after U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan in Manhattan rejected a request by his lawyers to delay a deposition scheduled for Oct. 19.

    Kaplan is presiding over the case in which Carroll said Trump raped her in the dressing room of a Manhattan Bergdorf Goodman store in the mid-1990s. He called the lawsuit “a complete con job.”

    “I don’t know this woman, have no idea who she is, other than it seems she got a picture of me many years ago, with her husband, shaking my hand on a reception line at a celebrity charity event,” Trump said.

    “She completely made up a story that I met her at the doors of this crowded New York City Department Store and, within minutes, ‘swooned’ her. It is a Hoax and a lie, just like all the other Hoaxes that have been played on me for the past seven years,” he said.

    Then he grumbled: “Now all I have to do is go through years more of legal nonsense in order to clear my name of her and her lawyer’s phony attacks on me. This can only happen to ‘Trump’!”

    Carroll is scheduled to be deposed on Friday.

    Roberta Kaplan, Carroll’s attorney, said she was pleased with the judge’s ruling and looked forward to filing new claims next month “and moving forward to trial with all dispatch” after New York state passed the Adult Survivors Act, allowing her to sue for damages for the alleged rape without the statute of limitations blocking it.

    After Trump’s statement was released, a spokesperson for Kaplan’s firm, Kaplan Hecker & Fink, said the “latest statement from Donald Trump obviously does not merit a response.”

    Trump’s legal team has tried various legal tactics to delay the lawsuit and prevent him from being questioned by Carroll’s attorneys. But Judge Kaplan wrote that it was time to move forward, especially given the “advanced age” of Carroll, 78, and Trump, 76, and perhaps other witnesses.

    “The defendant should not be permitted to run the clock out on plaintiff’s attempt to gain a remedy for what allegedly was a serious wrong,” he wrote.

    Carroll’s lawsuit claims that Trump damaged her reputation in 2019 when he denied raping her. Trump’s legal team has been trying to quash the lawsuit by arguing that the Republican was just doing his job as president when he denied the allegations, including when he dismissed his accuser as “not my type.”

    Trump doubled down on the comment in his statement Wednesday, saying: “And, while I am not supposed to say it, I will. This woman is not my type! She has no idea what day, what week, what month, what year, or what decade this so-called ‘event’ supposedly took place. The reason she doesn’t know is because it never happened, and she doesn’t want to get caught up with details or facts that can be proven wrong.”

    Whether Trump will remain the defendant in the original lawsuit is a key question because if Trump was acting within the scope of his duties as a federal employee, the U.S. government would become the defendant in the case.

    The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said in a split decision last month that Trump was a federal employee when he commented on Carroll’s claims. But it asked another court in Washington to decide whether Trump’s public statements occurred during the scope of his employment.

    Kaplan, the judge, said Trump has repeatedly tried to delay the collection of evidence in the lawsuit.

    “Given his conduct so far in this case, Mr. Trump’s position regarding the burdens of discovery is inexcusable,” he wrote. “As this Court previously has observed, Mr. Trump has litigated this case since it began in 2019 with the effect and probably the purpose of delaying it.”

    The judge noted that the collection of evidence for the lawsuit to go to trial was virtually concluded, except for the depositions of Trump and Carroll.

    “Mr. Trump has conducted extensive discovery of the plaintiff, yet produced virtually none himself,” Kaplan said. “Completing these depositions — which already have been delayed for years — would impose no undue burden on Mr. Trump, let alone any irreparable injury.”

    The judge also said the deposition could be useful when Carroll’s lawyer next month files the new lawsuit.

    Whether the rape occurred is central to the defamation claims, as well as the anticipated new lawsuit, the judge said.

    ———

    Associated Press Writer Jill Colvin reported from Washington

    Source link