A lawyer representing former President Trump in a defamation case brought by columnist E. Jean Carroll insisted Sunday in a court filing that Trump should be allowed to testify at the trial this upcoming week, pushing back on the “unprecedented” barriers proposed by Carroll’s team.
Trump’s lawyer Alina Habba outlined several issues with Carroll’s legal team’s requests, including “proposed unprecedented hurdles and unsupported ‘prophylactic measures and curative instructions’ in the event President Trump decides to testify in his upcoming trial.”
“This letter, which is the second letter motion that Plaintiff has filed in a two-day period leading up to trial, is nothing more than another desperate attempt to pigeonhole President Trump’s defense and to prevent his legal team from preparing for the upcoming trial,” Habba wrote.
Habba pushed back on the idea that Trump would have nothing to contribute in his testimony in the trial, in which Carroll is seeking $10 million in damages for defamation by the former president. The trial will determine what Trump owes in damages after a jury last year determined that Trump was liable for sexual battery.
Habba argued Trump should be allowed to testify to “the affirmative questions he was asked by reporters, which propagated his response and denial to Ms. Carroll’s story in New York magazine, and whether he was acting with hatred or ill will when he provided answers.” Habba also said Trump should be allowed to testify to the “circumstances of his comments, as they related to comments in Ms. Carroll’s continuous parade of interviews and publicity.”
Habba also took issue with the request that Trump be required “to state on the record and under oath, out of the presence of the jury, but in open court — that he understands that it is established (only) for purposes of this trial that he sexually assaulted Ms. Carroll, and that he spoke falsely with actual malice and lied … accusing her of fabricating her account and impugning her motives.”
Habba said Trump is “well aware of the court’s rulings” on the matter but still maintains his innocence.0
The other proposals, Habba said, “are similarly far-fetched and highly prejudicial,” including the requirement that there be evidence provided in support of testimony Trump plans to share. Habba also pushed back on the requirement of “admonishing Mr. Trump with respect to the conclusions and testimonial implications of the Court’s collateral estoppel decision,” and on the requirement of informing Trump of consequences for not following the court’s rules.
“This is unnecessary and certainly should not be done within the presence of the jury, as making this warning in front of the jury would certainly prejudice President Trump and his defense,” Habba said.
“Given the Court’s prior rulings in this case, President Trump’s ability to defend himself at trial is already severely limited. Precluding him from taking the stand altogether would be a manifest injustice and a clear violation of his constitutional rights.”
On Saturday, Carroll’s team suggested that Trump’s lawyer misrepresented the former president’s need to delay the trial in connection to $10 million in defamation damages that the writer is seeking.
Habba in her letter said it was improper for Carroll’s team to suggest that Trump could not offer any valuable testimony, arguing “he can still offer considerable testimony in his defense — testimony that he should not be made to share with Plaintiff before the trial.”