New York City
Former President Donald Trump sat attentively in the courtroom of his New York civil fraud trial on Thursday, watching as the defense's final expert witness, Eli Bartov, proclaimed that there was "no evidence whatsoever of any accounting fraud."
On Friday, Bartov revealed that he has made approximately $877,500 for his expert testimony in this case — charging $1,350 per hour for about 650 hours of work. When questioned by lawyers for the state of New York about who was paying him, Bartov replied that his bank statements showed some of the money was paid by the Trump Organization and some came from Trump's Save America PAC.
The discussion of Bartov's compensation came shortly after one of Trump's attorneys, Alina Habba, expressed her frustration to Judge Engoron about objections made by the attorney general's team.
"Why are we wasting our time if no one is listening to the words coming out of our experts' mouths?" Habba asked.
Expert Witnesses Reveal Fees in Trump Legal Battle
During the ongoing legal battles faced by former President Donald Trump, the exorbitant costs of expert witness testimony have come to light. Frederick Chin, a defense witness who testified on real estate valuation, disclosed that he billed $850 per hour for 1,000 hours of work, resulting in a total fee of $850,000. On the other hand, the state's sole expert witness, Michael McCarty, acknowledged receiving $950 per hour but worked significantly fewer hours, estimating his earnings at around $350,000.
These revelations shed light on the exorbitant costs associated with just one of Trump's numerous legal battles. The Save America PAC alone spent $40 million in the first half of this year on criminal and civil challenges.
During Thursday's proceedings, Trump remained at the courthouse throughout the day and occasionally addressed the media outside the courtroom. He repeatedly praised the testimony of Bartov, an accounting professor at New York University's Stern School of Business.
"This situation is disgraceful. I have never seen anything like it," said Trump. "However, this expert witness, who is highly respected by everyone and possesses an exceptional resume, stated that there was no fraud, no accounting fraud, and nothing."
Trump went on to commend Bartov's credentials as "a leading expert, a leading person, a man who sits on the Pulitzer committee, a highly respected individual from the Stern School at NYU, a top professor, and a very honest man, by the way." He added, "If he didn't agree, he wouldn't say what he's saying. And he said these were incredible loans. I didn't even need the money."
A witness named Bartov appeared to be the perfect fit for the former president, as he praised Trump's financial statements in the court hearing. Bartov described the statements as detailed and transparent, with the footnotes providing a wealth of information. He even went as far as saying that if these statements were submitted as a project in his class, they would receive an A grade.
However, the state's attorneys expressed doubt about Bartov's findings, leading to some tense moments in the courtroom. Attorney Kevin Wallace, representing the state attorney general, accused Bartov of being hired to say whatever the defense wanted. In response, Trump's attorney, Jesus Suarez, called Wallace's comment "nasty."
The tension escalated when Bartov shouted at Wallace, accusing him of making false allegations without any evidence. Suarez called Wallace's behavior "very rude."
Despite the heated exchange, Bartov stood by his assessment of Trump's financial statements and defended his integrity.
In Lawsuit Against Trump, Accountant Disputes Merit of Grounds
In his testimony, accountant Bartov strongly disputed the grounds of the lawsuit brought by the New York attorney general, Letitia James. Bartov argued that, from an accounting perspective, the lawsuit has no merit. He pointed out that Trump's financial statements included disclaimers, indicating that lenders should conduct their own due diligence. Bartov downplayed any discrepancies in the financial statements, stating that lenders are expected to make their own independent valuations.
During a heated exchange with Trump's attorneys, Judge Engoron stated that the case is not about valuations, but rather about statements of financial conditions. He emphasized that false statements cannot be used in business, which was the basis of the summary judgment decision. Judge Engoron believes this is the crux of the entire case.
Judge Engoron had previously ruled that Trump and the other defendants were liable for fraud in a partial summary judgment before the trial began. Trump, his sons Donald Jr and Eric, and their company are accused of inflating the value of assets on financial records to obtain favorable loans and insurance deals. They have maintained their innocence throughout the case.
Trump, who already testified last month, is scheduled to return to court on Monday, Dec. 11. The cross-examination of Bartov is expected to resume on Tuesday, marking the conclusion of this case.
