'Really absurd': Legal expert ridicules Trump lawyers' 'bizarre' choice in fraud case
January 11, 2024
Former President Donald Trump finished off the closing arguments in his civil fraud trial in New York with a personal speech that had to be cut short by the judge.
Ultimately, Trump's lawyers dropped the ball by letting this happen, argued former prosecutor Charles Coleman on Thursday's edition of MSNBC's "The ReidOut."
"Look, I'm not a lawyer, but even I know, if you represent yourself, you have a fool for a client," said anchor Joy Reid. "Have you ever as a prosecutor seen a defendant in a case, particularly when there's no jury, if there's no jury to convince, it's the judge that gets to decide — have you ever heard of a defendant in a case like this deciding to give part of the closing argument?"
ALSO READ:How Trump's campaign visits cost local police departments
"No, Joy," said Coleman. "This is as bizarre as it is consistent with everything that we continue to see out of Trumpworld here on Earth One, where everyone continues to operate on Earth Two in that sort of camp."
"Even if you had a client who wanted to testify, and you thought that was a bad idea, and you still allowed that client to exercise their right to testify, during your closing argument, you are absolutely not allowing your client to leave that judge or that jury with the final impression of what it is that your case represents," Coleman continued. "Particularly if you know or have any inkling that that client is going to get on the stand and get in the well and gesticulate and berate the court officers and berate the judge and the entire justice system that is responsible for conducting this hearing, that you are an officiant of, as a lawyer, you're not going to do that."
"Really absurd, bizarre, and also consistent," he added.
Watch the video below or at the link.
Leave a Comment
Related Post