Why Trump U suits will move forward, without videos of testimony

Judge Gonzalo Curiel said in a decision Tuesday that public interest in videos of Donald Trump's testimony about the program didn't outweigh concerns about biasing a jury.

|
Bebeto Matthews/AP/File
Donald Trump listens as Michael Sexton introduces him at a news conference announcing the establishment of Trump University in New York in May 2005. On Tuesday, a federal judge overseeing two class action suits against the real estate training program allowed the suits to go forward, but dismissed a request for the release of videos of Mr. Trump testifying about Trump University.

In the ongoing saga of the now-defunct Trump University, the federal judge who Donald Trump lambasted as a “hater” has given Mr. Trump both temporary relief and a possibly looming worry.

Judge Gonzalo Curiel declined to release video of Trump testifying in a lawsuit filed by former Trump University students, a relief to Trump’s lawyers, who had argued the videos could be used for attack ads as Trump heads toward the November election.

But he also rejected their bid to dismiss the suit entirely, allowing it to move to trial after the election. In a written decision released Tuesday, Curiel said the former students had raised a genuine question about whether the real estate magnate had “knowingly participated in a scheme to defraud.”

Trump and his lawyers have long denied the claims against Trump University, saying they came only from a small group of unhappy students, the The New York Times reports.

Trump has said that “98 percent of of the people who took the courses ... thought they were terrific.” But the lawsuit and some former students have said that they felt pressure from Trump University’s instructors to provide positive evaluations of the program.

“It was a con,” former student Ryan Maddings told the Daily Beast. Mr. Maddings, an ex-Marine, said he been encouraged by representatives of Trump University to max out his credit cards to pay for seminars and products, racking up $45,000 in credit card debt in the process.

The videos have emerged as a significant issue in the case, in federal court in San Diego. Attorneys for the students have said that Trump's tone, facial expressions, gestures, and body language show “complete and utter unfamiliarity” with instructors and what was taught at the real-estate training program, the Associated Press reports.

That contradicts Trump’s claims that he hand-picked instructors and was actively involved in the program.They also say Trump made “many spontaneous and ad hominem remarks that are not reflected in the paper transcript of his depositions,” some of which have been released.

Judge Curiel, however, wrote that “while there is a degree of legitimate public interest in the demeanor of the defendant in the deposition videos,” that did not outweigh the potential effects media scrutiny of the footage would have on a jury, the AP reports.

Many news organizations have also taken an interest in the release of the videos showing Trump talking about the program, which the students have alleged used high-pressure sales tactics and made deceptive claims about what they would gain from it, using Trump’s name as enticement.

Trump’s attorneys, by contrast, argued that Curiel should follow the approach of a federal judge in a case involving former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s email practices. In that case, US District Judge Emmet Sullivan in the District of Columbia allowed the release of transcripts from depositions, but not video, the AP reports.

As Curiel allowed the case to move forward, setting a trial date of Nov. 28 in one of the two lawsuits he is overseeing, that also sets Trump up to face a federal RICO case, which could impose a significant financial penalty, The Atlantic reports.

Trump has harshly criticized the judge, including calling him a “hater of Donald Trump” and describing the Indiana-born judge as “Mexican,” drawing criticism from Republican leaders

A third case against Trump University brought by New York attorney general Eric Schneiderman is also heading to trial after a hearing Tuesday.

Curiel noted on Tuesday that while he was allowing the case to move forward, he was not passing judgment on the students’ allegations. “The Court does not engage in credibility determinations, weighing of evidence, or drawing of legitimate inferences from the facts; these functions are for the [jury],” he wrote.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Why Trump U suits will move forward, without videos of testimony
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2016/0803/Why-Trump-U-suits-will-move-forward-without-videos-of-testimony
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe