Prosecutors leading Trump fraud investigation in New York resign
Mazars said he did not, “as a whole,” find any material discrepancies between the information provided by the Trump Organization and the actual value of Mr. Trump’s assets.
But given what he called “the totality of the circumstances” – including his internal investigation and Ms James’ court documents – Mazars asked the company to inform anyone who received the statements that they “should not be invoked”.
Even with Mazars recanting, a criminal case would likely be difficult to prove. The documents, known as statements of financial position, contain a number of disclaimers, including acknowledgments that Mr Trump’s accountants had not audited or authenticated his claims.
Understanding the Trump investigation of the New York AG
An empire under surveillance. The New York State Attorney General is currently conducting a civil investigation into the business practices of former President Donald Trump. Here’s what you need to know:
And prosecutors would have to show that Mr. Trump’s penchant for hyperbole has crossed the line of criminality, a tall order when it comes to something as subjective as property values. A case like this could hinge on the testimony of a Trump insider, but prosecutors have not persuaded Mr. Weisselberg to cooperate with the investigation, depriving them of the type of insider witness whose testimony may be crucial to complicated white collar criminal trials.
Another challenge is that Mr. Trump’s lenders might not appear to a jury as sympathetic victims. Lenders, who have earned Mr. Trump millions of dollars in interest, have made their own appraisals of his assets.
Still, prosecutors had moved on.
In the fall, Mr. Vance convened what is called a special grand jury, a panel of 23 randomly selected Manhattanites, to hear complex cases like the one involving Mr. Trump. Over the months, jurors were expected to reconvene to hear witness testimony and consider other evidence presented by prosecutors.
Special grand juries last six months, and at the end of these presentations, prosecutors typically order jurors to vote on whether there is “reasonable cause” to believe the person might be guilty. While it’s not a foregone conclusion that a grand jury will indict the target of an investigation, these panels routinely vote to bring the charges prosecutors seek.