Not that long ago, a New York judge ruled against Trump in a civil lawsuit. The suit was brought by the state’s attorney general. Many legal experts criticized the trial and the ruling. Despite this, the liberal-leaning judge demanded Trump pay nearly half a billion dollars, for starters.
Trump is fighting this verdict. It is possible it could get overturned in the appeals process.
But it seems the judge who presided over this case is in hot water. He was criticized for showing bias against Trump during the trial. And now, an interview from a few months ago is exposing what he might have done. This is so concerning it has triggered the judge’s worst nightmare.
From Daily Caller:
The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct is investigating an alleged interaction between a New York real estate lawyer and the judge who issued a $454 million judgment against former President Donald Trump, according to NBC New York…“I actually had the ability to speak to him three weeks ago,” Bailey said… “I saw him in the corner [at the courthouse] and I told my client, ‘I need to go.’ And I walked over and we started talking … I wanted him to know what I think and why…I really want him to get it right.”
Yet again, we are hearing about possible ethics violations by Democrats running at Trump. A Georgia district attorney has been accused of various violations. Now, Judge Engoron, the infamous judge who presided over Trump’s civil case, is under investigation by the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct.
According to an interview from February, a real estate lawyer named Adam Leitman Bailey claimed he spoke to Engoron about the case before he made his decision. Bailey said during an interview, that he spoke with the judge when he saw him at the courthouse.
Bailey apparently asked the judge about the case, giving Engoron his opinion. The lawyer said he “really [wanted] him to get it right.” That sounds like Bailey was discussing the case with the judge outside the trial and tried to influence him. If true, that is called an “ex parte” conversation.
Judges are not allowed to discuss a case without the parties involved (or their lawyers) being present. This Bailey lawyer was not even involved in the case, yet he tried to assert his opinion on the trial. It could be that this lawyer put pressure on the judge to rule against Trump.
Engoron denies an ex parte conservation happened. Yet the state still opened an investigation into the matter. Regardless of how the commission rules on this matter, it could give Trump an upper hand. His lawyers could use this controversy to help get Engoron’s ruling thrown out.
Source: Daily Caller
89
]
