Watch: New York Attorney General Letitia James speaks after Trump ordered to pay $354m in landmark fraud case
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Watch as New York Attorney General Letitia James speaks on the civil fraud trial against Donald Trump and the Trump Organization on Friday 16 February.
The former president, his adult sons and their chief associates have been ordered to pay more than $364 million (£280m) after a months-long case targeting fraud in the family business.
Mr Trump has also been banned from running businesses in New York for three years. His sons, Eric and Donald Jr, received similar bans for two years.
Justice Arthur Engoron delivered his verdict in the New York civil fraud trial on Friday, after the judge had already ruled that Mr Trump inflated his wealth on financial statements that were given to banks and insurers to make deals and secure favourable loans.
Following the ruling, the former president took to his Truth Social platform to vent his anger, describing the decision as a “complete and total sham” and unsubstantially accused the judge and prosecutors of being “deluded, biased and crooked”.
Ms James, who brought the case, had sought $370m in disgorgement from the entities.
Subscribe to Independent Premium to bookmark this article
Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Premium subscription today.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments