[1]https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/2022/12/02/trump-org-defense-t
   eam-calls-for-mistrial-over-das-references-to-ex-presidents-actions/?kw
   =Trump%20Org%20Defense%20Team%20Calls%20for%20Mistrial%20Over%20DA%27s%
   20References%20to%20Ex-President%27s%20Actions
   Former President Donald Trump speaks at Trump National Golf Club in
   Bedminster, N.J., Wednesday, July 7, 2021. Photo: Seth Wenig/AP
   NEWS
   Trump Org Defense Team Calls for Mistrial Over DA's References to
   Ex-President's Actions
   Defense attorney Michael van der Veen argued that the Manhattan DA had
   presented Donald Trump as an unindicted co-conspirator in the fraud
   scheme, putting a bias on the jury “that can’t be undone.”
   December 02, 2022 at 02:51 PM
    4 minute read
   Criminal Law
   Jane Wester
   Jane Wester More from This Author
   During his closing argument Friday in the criminal tax fraud trial of
   the Trump Organization, Manhattan assistant district attorney Joshua
   Steinglass showed jurors a memo initialed by former President Donald
   Trump.
   In the memo, Trump Organization chief operating officer Matthew
   Calamari asked the company’s controller, Jeffrey McConney, to reduce
   his salary by $72,000, the amount the Trump Organization paid for his
   rent in 2012. Prosecutors have argued the process of “backing out”
   personal expenses from executives’ salaries was one way the Trump
   Organization avoided taxes in the later years of the alleged fraud
   scheme.
   Steinglass noted that Trump had written “OK” and his initials on the
   memo in his signature black Sharpie.
   “There’s only one reason for that, which is to underreport income,”
   Steinglass said. “Mr. Trump is explicitly sanctioning tax fraud.”
   The Trump Organization defense team immediately offered an objection,
   which was sustained by Acting Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan.
   Steinglass reiterated after a sidebar that Trump “is not on trial,” but
   he emphasized that jurors should be skeptical of the defense narrative
   that McConney and Allen Weisselberg, who pleaded guilty to 15 counts in
   August and testified under a plea agreement, “went rogue” and acted
   without the knowledge or approval of the company’s CEO.
   “This whole narrative to show Donald Trump was blissfully ignorant is
   just not real,” he said, later urging jurors to “put aside the elephant
   that’s not in the room” while remembering that “the rules apply to
   everyone.”
   The “explicitly sanctioning” comment was one of several issues raised
   by Trump Organization defense attorney Michael van der Veen when he
   moved for a mistrial at the conclusion of Steinglass’ summation.
   “We picked a jury and voir dired a jury based on the People’s
   representation that this case was not going to be about Donald Trump,”
   van der Veen said.
   Van der Veen argued that Steinglass had presented Trump as an
   unindicted co-conspirator in the fraud scheme, putting a bias on the
   jury “that can’t be undone.”
   Steinglass argued that the DA’s theory has always been that corporate
   liability is predicated on the actions of Weisselberg and McConney, not
   Trump, but Trump was nevertheless the CEO and president of the Trump
   Organization.
   “If the name of the CEO were John Doe, there’d be no objection here,”
   Steinglass said.
   Merchan said he did not recall Steinglass promising not to mention
   Trump. Instead, he said, he recalled Steinglass saying the DA’s case
   would not get into politics or suggest Trump should be sitting at the
   defense table.
   “I don’t believe that it’s necessary to declare a mistrial,” Merchan
   said. “In fact, that’s not even really a thought.”
   The Trump Organization defense attorneys also objected strongly to a
   chart prepared for Steinglass’ closing argument, which Merchan
   eventually allowed him to present.
   The chart showed the various ways in which Weisselberg earned money
   through salary, bonus and unreported personal expenses across the years
   of the alleged fraud scheme.
   Steinglass argued that, contrary to the defense team’s argument that
   the Trump Organization saved only an incidental amount on Medicare
   taxes through Weisselberg’s scheme, the company saved hundreds of
   thousands of dollars by funding its executives’ cars and apartments
   with so-called “pre-tax” dollars.
   “In order to do this legally, to get the same amount into Allen
   Weisselberg’s pockets, the Trump Corp. and Trump Payroll Corp. would
   have had to gross him up roughly double,” Steinglass said.
   RELATED STORIES
   Trump Org Lawyers, Manhattan DA Clash Over References to Ex-President
   in Closing Arguments
   'Weisselberg Did It for Weisselberg': Trump Org Defense Attorneys Make
   Closing Arguments in Fraud Trial
   Trump Org, Resting Defense Case, Blasts 'Misleading' Testimony of
   Mazars Accountant
   You Might Like

References

   1. https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/2022/12/02/trump-org-defense-team-calls-for-mistrial-over-das-references-to-ex-presidents-actions/?kw=Trump Org Defense Team Calls for Mistrial Over DA's References to Ex-President's Actions