Trump's rant at end of trial could doom his appeal in fraud case: report

Donald Trump put his New York real estate empire in jeopardy when he broke into a 5-minute rant in the middle of his $370 million civil fraud trial, legal experts told the Messenger Friday.

That’s because, according to Columbia University Law Professor John Coffee, the case is most like headed to an appellate court that will likely be less than pleased with his closing argument antics.

“If you keep saying everything in New York is a travesty, even though it's been done under the supervision of the appellate division, ” Coffee told the Messenger. “I don't think you make them happy.”

ALSO READ: How Trump's campaign visits cost local police departments

Trump denied wrongdoing throughout the months-long trial in New York City's civil court. But New York Attorney General Letitia James argued he defrauded lenders by inflating the value of his assets. Judge Arthur Engoron agreed in a pre-trial ruling finding Trump liable for fraud.

Trump responded throughout the trial with personal accusations against James, Engoron, and his staff, all of whom he accused of orchestrating a political witch hunt against him.

In defense of a gag order levied against Trump, Engoron revealed he received antisemitic and violent threats, culminating with a bomb scare at his home the day of closing arguments.

Attorney Tristan Snell, a former assistant New York attorney general who helped take on the Trump Foundation, believes the appellate court won’t be able to ignore Trump's personal attacks, inside or outside the courtroom.

“All of that is stuff that's definitely going to be considered as part of a pattern and practice of complete disrespect for the law in New York State,” Snell said to the outlet. “All of that is fair game.”

Former federal prosecutor Mitchell Epner agreed, adding that Trump’s tirade will also likely influence Engoron as he decides on the damages Trump owes.

“I can easily imagine Justice Engoron citing Trump’s flouting of the Court’s orders regarding the scope of his closing remarks to buttress whatever financial penalties and industry bar he imposes,” Epner reportedly said, “stating that his conduct demonstrates the need for deterrence and incapacitation.”