Fun
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Judge Engoron Accused of Banging Secretary of Opposing Counsel in Previous Case

"On Friday, far left Judge Arthur Engoron fleeced $355 million from President Trump for taking out loans in New York State and paying them back on time and with interest. The charges were brought against Trump by crazed New York State Attorney General Letitia James. There were no victims in the so-called crime. The banks did their due diligence before they loaned Donald Trump the money and testified they would gladly do it again.

Judge Engoron called this a crime and ruled that President Donald Trump owed the state $355 million. But that’s not all. As Volokh Conspiracy reported Engoron also put a Clinton-appointed judge in control of Trump business empire in New York State:

Judge Engoron also appointed retired U.S. District Judge Barbara Jones to continue in her role as an “independent monitor” of the Trump business empire but expanded her authority to review financial disclosures before they are submitted to third parties. Judge Jones can hire an independent director of compliance, and she has the authority to compel Trump to sell some or even all of his businesses down the road. This is all punishment for Trump allegedly committing fraud by falsely in inflating and deflating the value of his real estate assets to pay lower state taxes and to receive more favorable loans from banks.

Judge Arthur Engoron, a committed Democrat, has ruled repeatedly against Trump in the three years he’s been presiding over James’ lawsuit. According to the AP he’s forced Trump to sit for a deposition, held him in contempt and fined him $110,000.

According to reports Judge Engoron has been married three times and has four children.

But Arthur Engoron is no boy scout.

Engoron was banging the secretary of opposing counsel during a previous case – a complete ethics violation.

Nathan Lewin, a defense attorney for the Union of Orthodox Rabbis of the United States and Canada, said the court’s Jan. 23 ruling against his client in several pre-trial decisions is “suspect” because of that relationship, of which he was not informed until late last month.

Lewin is defending the rabbis in an $11 defamation million suit filed by Helen Chayie Sieger of Borough Park, who claims their decision to allow her husband to remarry without requiring him to grant her a rabbinic divorce in effect labeled her an unfit spouse.

Lewin said in court papers that the law secretary, Arthur Engoron, claims he only began dating the secretary of the opposing counsel, Christopher Sullivan, on May 10. But Lewin said Sullivan’s actions in the case may have been “influenced” by information he received from the woman, identified in the papers only as Sue.

And Lewin noted that Engoron “was drafting [later] decisions and communicating” with the judge about this case during the time he was dating Sue.

Schoenfeld, at the request of the defendants, recused himself from the case July 1 after revealing that he had recently learned of the relationship. He said Engoron’s conduct raised ethical questions that he would report to the appropriate authorities, Lewin noted in his papers. Lewin said actions taken in this case may be criminal in nature and asked the court to conduct a full investigation."
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
I think that case will go for appeal. Two things: 1.James before becoming NY State attorney general publicly ran on going after Trump. 2. Before the trial commenced Engoron stated that Trump and his associates engaged in fraud.( Made the statement that an illegal action by Trump/ associates occurred and this before the start of the trial)
And it would seem a number of his past decisions were not let stand.
@soar2newhighs he decided Trump was guilty until proven innocent...then was proven innocent, but found guilty anyway. Everyone knows this is a clown show and the decision will be overturned. Trump will still be out the legal fees + time wasted when he should be campaigning.
@BizSuitStacy Not to sound like a cliche, but this only makes him stronger. It also will shine a number of lights on a number of people who attempted to use the legal system to interfere with his ability to deal with running for election.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
@sladejr The Eighth Amendment (Amendment VIII) to the United States Constitution protects against imposing excessive bail, excessive fines, or cruel and unusual punishments. This amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791, along with the rest of the United States Bill of Rights.[1] The amendment serves as a limitation upon the state or federal government to impose unduly harsh penalties on criminal defendants before and after a conviction. This limitation applies equally to the price for obtaining pretrial release and the punishment for crime after conviction.[2] The phrases in this amendment originated in the English Bill of Rights of 1689.

The prohibition against cruel and unusual punishments has led courts to hold that the Constitution totally prohibits certain kinds of punishment, such as drawing and quartering. Under the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause, the Supreme Court has struck down the application of capital punishment in some instances, but capital punishment is still permitted in some cases where the defendant is convicted of murder.

The Supreme Court has held that the Excessive Fines Clause prohibits fines that are "so grossly excessive as to amount to a deprivation of property without due process of law". The Court struck down a fine as excessive for the first time in United States v. Bajakajian (1998). Under the Excessive Bail Clause, the Supreme Court has held that the federal government cannot set bail at "a figure higher than is reasonably calculated" to ensure the defendant's appearance at trial. The Supreme Court has ruled that the Excessive Fines Clause and the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause apply to the states, but has not done this regarding the Excessive Bail Clause.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment