NY AG files civil fraud suit against Trump

[Segnosaur]

She isn't getting out of it.

Can she plead the 5th?

That's highly questionable. Ivanka hasn't been criminally indicted anywhere. There isn't any evidence suggesting she is being investigated and this isn't a criminal trial.

I'm pretty sure the answer is no.

Not a legal expert, but... even though she is "just" a witness at this point (with no indictments), I believe she still has the right to plead the 5th.

From: Law.com
Despite the Fifth Amendment’s focus on testimony in criminal cases, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that the right against self-incrimination extends to civil cases as well. See McCarthy v. Arndstein, 266 U.S. 34 (1924). A witness or defendant in a civil case may assert the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination if she can show that there is a real possibility that criminal authorities could use the information sought in a pending or future criminal case against her.

(I think the key here is "future case"... i.e. you plead the 5th in the event that they might bring charges some time later, even if you are not currently a defendant.)

Of course, the problem is pleading the 5th might be damaging to Trump's case. Prosecutor: "Tell us about Trump's activities". Ivanka: "I plead the 5th because it was all illegal".

 

[Ranb]

So if a witness pleads the fifth in a civil case, can that be used against the defendant?

 

[acbytesla]

Not a legal expert, but... even though she is "just" a witness at this point (with no indictments), I believe she still has the right to plead the 5th.

From: Law.com
Despite the Fifth Amendment’s focus on testimony in criminal cases, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that the right against self-incrimination extends to civil cases as well. See McCarthy v. Arndstein, 266 U.S. 34 (1924). A witness or defendant in a civil case may assert the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination if she can show that there is a real possibility that criminal authorities could use the information sought in a pending or future criminal case against her.
(I think the key here is "future case"... i.e. you plead the 5th in the event that they might bring charges some time later, even if you are not currently a defendant.)

Of course, the problem is pleading the 5th might be damaging to Trump's case. Prosecutor: "Tell us about Trump's activities". Ivanka: "I plead the 5th because it was all illegal".

The key is the highlighted text. "Criminal case against her." Not Donald. As I noted. There is no investigation of her. She even got removed as a defendant in this case.

I'm sure she could plead the Fifth, but the judge will likely have none of it. Now if she is truly in criminal jeopardy, nothing in her testimony will be able to be used against her in a criminal trial. It however could be used against her father and siblings.


Later edit
Let me clarify that. That is if she attempts not to answer a question by taking the Fifth. Not necessarily on everything she might say.

Kind of a gray area. But let's say she objects to a question by invoking the Fifth. And the judge overrules her objection, it would not be able to be used against her in a future criminal trial.

But if she doesn't invoke the Fifth it could be used.

 

[Stacyhs]

According to Forbes:

An appeals court dismissed Ivanka Trump from the case in June, ruling the claims against her in the lawsuit, from before she left the Trump Organization in early 2017, were barred by the statute of limitations.

Since she cannot be charged due to the statute of limitations, I don't think she can be charged in the future. This would disallow her claiming the 5th.

 

[acbytesla]

According to Forbes:

Since she cannot be charged due to the statute of limitations, I don't think she can be charged in the future. This would disallow her claiming the 5th.

It should be noted that Donald will be testifying as a hostile witness. That means that the prosecution will be able to prevent him from rambling answers. It is almost certain Trump will screw the pooch.

 

[Stacyhs]

As with Ivanka, expect a lot of "I can't recall/remember" replies from Donnie.

 

[Darat]

As with Ivanka, expect a lot of "I can't recall/remember" replies from Donnie.

He may try his classic “I don’t have my glasses” and the old “I don’t read everything I sign, I have people to do that for me.” (Those are two excuses he has used in court cases in the past.)

 

[Craig4]

As with Ivanka, expect a lot of "I can't recall/remember" replies from Donnie.

The AG's team will have plenty of documents to admit into evidence to jog her memory. She's a Trump so you can probably expect some self-serving admissions about the two lice who are defendants.

 

[Darat]

It should be noted that Donald will be testifying as a hostile witness. That means that the prosecution will be able to prevent him from rambling answers. It is almost certain Trump will screw the pooch.

Probably the first time they have someone who is a hostile witness for both sides…

 

[acbytesla]

As with Ivanka, expect a lot of "I can't recall/remember" replies from Donnie.

Yes, but I bet there will be emails, documents and other testimonies that will go a long way to box her in.

 

[Darat]

So, getting her dropped from the fraud lawsuit might actually be more harmful in the long run.

(She was originally one of the defendants, but an appeals court removed her because she supposedly hadn't been involved with the Trump organization since Trump took office and she became an 'advisor' to the president.)

Had she just remained part of the lawsuit, she would have been able to plead the 5th. Now, she has to testify against her father (potentially embarrassing, and could open her up to perjury charges if she lies.)

“If”? She is still a Trump.

 

[alfaniner]

Yes, but I bet there will be emails, documents and other testimonies that will go a long way to box her in.

...and tapes. Oh Lordy, I hope there are tapes!

 

[Stacyhs]

...and tapes. Oh Lordy, I hope there are tapes!

 

[acbytesla]

So, getting her dropped from the fraud lawsuit might actually be more harmful in the long run.

(She was originally one of the defendants, but an appeals court removed her because she supposedly hadn't been involved with the Trump organization since Trump took office and she became an 'advisor' to the president.)

Had she just remained part of the lawsuit, she would have been able to plead the 5th. Now, she has to testify against her father (potentially embarrassing, and could open her up to perjury charges if she lies.)

Maybe. This is a civil trial. She can only take the Fifth in a criminal trial or show her testimony would likely be used against her criminally.

 

[Craig4]

Maybe. This is a civil trial. She can only take the Fifth in a criminal trial or show her testimony would likely be used against her criminally.

She can assert 5th Amendment protections in a civil trial. However, the judge can assume an adverse inference from her assertion.

 

[Stacyhs]

She can assert 5th Amendment protections in a civil trial. However, the judge can assume an adverse inference from her assertion.

As posted above:

A witness or defendant in a civil case may assert the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination if she can show that there is a real possibility that criminal authorities could use the information sought in a pending or future criminal case against her.

And:

According to Forbes:

Quote:
An appeals court dismissed Ivanka Trump from the case in June, ruling the claims against her in the lawsuit, from before she left the Trump Organization in early 2017, were barred by the statute of limitations.

Since she cannot be charged due to the statute of limitations, I don't think she can be charged in the future. This would disallow her claiming the 5th.

 

[Norman Alexander]

He may try his classic “I don’t have my glasses” and the old “I don’t read everything I sign, I have people to do that for me.” (Those are two excuses he has used in court cases in the past.)

We took the trouble to bring your glasses for you. Here they are. Please read.

It doesn't matter if you read them or not. You signed them, so you took responsibility for them, not the coffee-making hordes that seem to infest your offices.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

I worked at my local airport when I was a teenager. I did a lot of chocking.

Props to you!

 

[Orphia Nay]

It'll be an interesting week.

"Donald Trump Jr. is now set to testify next Wednesday, brother Eric on Thursday and sister Ivanka on Nov. 3, though her lawyers may appeal to try to block her testimony."

https://apnews.com/article/c7018a92f3a2cb2496a55ad1cacf2412

 

[Craig4]

It'll be an interesting week.

"Donald Trump Jr. is now set to testify next Wednesday, brother Eric on Thursday and sister Ivanka on Nov. 3, though her lawyers may appeal to try to block her testimony."

https://apnews.com/article/c7018a92f3a2cb2496a55ad1cacf2412

[qimg]https://media.giphy.com/media/Bzebpz5rnyBb2/giphy.gif[/qimg]

Are we taking bets on Trump having a heart attack or a stoke? It looks like he's on the verge of either.