Donald Trump and children to testify in fraud case
Donald Trump and three of his children will soon take the stand in a New York business fraud case.
A judge ruled on Friday that Mr Trump’s daughter, Ivanka, must testify in the case against her brothers and father.
She was dismissed as a defendant in the case earlier this year – but her brothers Eric and Donald Jr were not.
The New York Attorney General’s Office said the former president will testify on 6 November and his three children will take the stand before him.
Their testimony is expected over three days from Wednesday next week, starting with Donald Trump Jr.
Judge Arthur Engoron has already ruled that Mr Trump inflated the value of his properties to secure favourable loans.
The trial focuses on six other claims made in the lawsuit, including falsification of business records, insurance fraud and conspiracy.
Mr Trump has previously said he would take the stand at the earliest opportunity. He and the other defendants have denied the allegations.
His daughter Ivanka had previously sought not to take the stand, arguing that she had moved out of the city to Florida and had stepped away from the Trump Organization in 2017.
But Judge Engoron said she still maintains ties to Trump businesses and real estate in New York.
Prosecutors have argued that Ms Trump has important information to share about the events being examined in the case.
In his ruling on Friday about Ivanka testifying, Judge Engoron sided with the prosecutors, writing: “Ms Trump has clearly availed herself of the privilege of doing business in New York.”
He cited documents showing that she still had ownership or management ties to some businesses in New York, and that she still owns Manhattan apartments.
The civil fraud case was brought against the former president by New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is a Democrat.
Ms James is seeking $250m (£205m) in penalties and severe restrictions for Mr Trump’s businesses.
Mr Trump, the front-runner for the Republican nomination in the 2024 election, has dismissed the case as politically motivated and a “sham”.
Comments (0)