Donald Trump's lawyers keep making long-shot bids to end his New York fraud trial, and observers have laughed at loud at their far-fetched efforts.
Justice Arthur Engoron, the judge who's presiding over the case, has already found Trump liable for fraud in a summary judgment before the proceedings started, but the former president's legal team has asked three separate times for a "directed verdict," which would end the case in his favor and almost never works, reported The Daily Beast.
“Three times is excessive," said retired state judge Carolyn E. Demarest. "I think they're just taking a shot in the dark here. It just sounds like a ‘Hail Mary’ pass."
Demarest doesn't recall a single instance where she granted a request for a directed verdict in nearly 35 years on the bench, and the Trump legal team's have "elicited muted laughter in the courtroom," according to The Daily Beast, because they're so unusual in the first place and almost never happen while the trial is still underway.
“It would be very, very rare to direct a verdict before the evidence is complete," Demarest said. "At the end of the entire case, you might ask for a directed verdict, because you’d say, ‘They didn’t prove it.’ In very rare circumstances, it’s possible the case wasn’t proved. But that would be one request for a directed verdict."
Another former state judge compared the requests to a criminal trial where a defense attorney asked for the charges to be dismissed, although Trump is facing potentially huge monetary damages, and not prison time.
“It’s not anything that’s unethical or improper," said retired judge Alan David Marrus. "It’s letting the judge know their client wants one."
“They serve at the pleasure of Mr. Trump," Marrus added. "When push comes to shove, if the client says, ‘I want you to do this,’ they can be relieved. I don’t think anything President Trump does embarrasses him. The lawyers are an extension of his client. The only thing embarrassing is if they have to appear before this judge again, and they probably won’t.”
Directed verdicts, although rarely granted, are meant to ask a judge or jury to keep an open mind, but Engoron has already concluded Trump broke the law by lying to banks and will determine the penalty after hearing all the testimony.
“A directed verdict motion says this: There’s not enough evidence here for the case to go to a jury," Pace University law professor Randolph M. McLaughlin, laughing. "The only wrinkle here is, there's no jury! They’re asking the judge to direct a verdict against himself."
“I’ve never heard of a lawyer asking on multiple occasions for a directed verdict – I’ve never heard of it,” McLaughlin added. “I understand you have to make motions, but some of what they’re doing borders on frivolousness. I don’t think they have any shame at all.”
