Trumps in the courtroom fuel 'bad blood' between lawyers at civil fraud trial: analysis

There’s “bad blood” between lawyers in Donald Trump’s $250 million fraud trial with one factor proving especially objectionable: Trumps in the courtroom, according to a new analysis.

Transcripts show an abnormally high number of objections in the Trump Organization's civil court case that only gets higher when the Trumps appear in the New York City courtroom themselves, CBS News reported Thursday.

"You have such bad blood here between the two sides," CBS News legal analyst Rikki Klieman said. “Their emotional quotients are high, and they're mad.”

The word “objection” appears nearly 600 times in court transcripts from the first 25 days of the civil court trial, where Trump and his two sons face off against New York Attorney General Letitia James' legal team, CBS News reports.

Lawyers on both sides object more often when anyone with the last name of Trump — the former president and his two sons have appeared as defendants and his daughter Ivanka as a witness — comes to court, the analysis shows.

There were 340 objections — 250 from the defense and 90 from the state — during the 12 days between Oct. 2 and Nov. 8 when a Trump appeared in court, according to the CBS tally.

That number dropped by 100 — about 210 from Trump’s lawyers and 30 from prosecutors — during the 13 days when the family stayed away, according to the report.

While Klieman said it was unlikely Trump’s lawyers objected more under the watchful gaze of their clients, New York prosecutor Arthur Aidala reportedly disagreed.

"I think it's just probably a way for the Trump attorneys to indicate to their client, 'We're here, we're paying attention,'” Aidala told CBS. He argued they could want to show they were "awake and doing [their] job."

ALSO READ: A neuroscientist explains how Donald Trump exploits the minds of conspiracy theorists

Aidala also noted the high number was unusual in a courtroom without the presence of a jury, which Klieman suggests showcases Trump attorneys’ feelings about Justice Arthur Engoron’s summary order.

The legal analyst argued Trump’s legal team felt cheated when Engoron found their client liable for fraud before proceedings began, and will very likely appeal.

"The defense really feels that by virtue of deciding the fraud issue first, that this is an unfair trial," Klieman said. "One of the ways that they are attempting to show how unfair it is to an appellate tribunal is by lodging these objections."