Last week, Judge Arthur Engoron, the judge presiding over the $250 million lawsuit filed against Trump and his co-defendants by the New York Attorney General, threatened to dismiss Trump from the stand during his testimony and impose a negative or adverse inference.
The imposition of a negative or adverse inference is a sanction most commonly imposed for a failure to comply with discovery in a civil case or where a civil defendant declines to answer questions based on a Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination,
Trump repeatedly declined to directly answer the questions being asked of him on direct examination by counsel to the New York Attorney General. He is reported to have provided meandering answers and to have made non-responsive speeches.
Judge Engoron pleaded with Trump’s counsel to control their client and reminded the former president that this was not a political rally and certain decorum was expected in Court.
Judge Engoron had warned that if Trump persisted in his refusal to directly answer questions, he would be dismissed and an adverse inference would be taken against him. In that event, Judge Engoron would presume that had Trump continued to testify his testimony would be adverse to his legal position.
Trump’s testimony concluded without need for the Court to take that drastic action.