New York judge who branded Trump a fraud speaks out on threats to his life

New York Judge Who Brandished Trump a Fraud Speaks Out on Life-Threatening Attacks

New York judge who branded Trump - Retired New York Judge Arthur Engoron, who presided over a landmark fraud case against Donald Trump, has revealed the relentless harassment he endured from the former president and his allies. Despite the conclusion of the trial, the judge continues to receive threatening messages, a testament to the intensity of the backlash he faced during the proceedings.

A Year of Intimidation and Allegations

The trial, which scrutinized Trump’s real estate practices, marked a defining moment in his legal history. Engoron, now in retirement, described how his home and office became targets of a barrage of hostile communications. “The threats never stopped,” he said, highlighting the personal nature of the attacks that extended beyond the courtroom.

During the civil proceeding, Trump’s team launched a campaign of personal attacks, with antisemitic and homophobic slurs flooding the judge’s inbox. One particularly alarming incident involved an envelope containing white powder delivered to his office, followed by a bomb threat to his family’s residence just hours before the trial’s final arguments. “It felt like a direct assault on my family’s safety,” Engoron recalled.

Presiding Over a Financial Scandal

Engoron’s investigation, led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, uncovered a multiyear scheme by Trump and his organization to mislead banks and inflate property values. The judge’s ruling in 2024 resulted in the seizure of over $364 million in “illegitimate profits,” a decision that sparked fierce opposition from Trump’s supporters.

“Judges must uphold the primary rule: They cannot retaliate,” Engoron said in an interview with CBS News. “It’s part of the job. No matter what you’re called, you keep your composure.”

The trial’s outcome, which concluded with Trump’s personal and financial liabilities, was met with an outpouring of hostility. Engoron’s court staff reported receiving hundreds of threatening messages, with some even containing personal attacks and disparaging remarks. “It wasn’t just about the case—it was about silencing a voice that challenged their narrative,” he noted.

The Aftermath of a Stormy Trial

Following the trial, the case remains active in the appeals process. While state appellate judges have affirmed Engoron’s findings of fraudulent activity, the former president has not ceased his efforts to undermine the judge. “The battle isn’t over,” Engoron emphasized, reflecting on the ongoing legal and political maneuvering.

During the trial’s final stages, Trump faced a moment of scrutiny when he was allowed to address the court personally. His legal team had initially intended to limit his remarks to the case, but Trump seized the opportunity to present a broader narrative of political persecution. “What happened here is a fraud on me,” he declared, framing the trial as a personal attack rather than a legal judgment.

“I had my moments of glory,” Engoron said, addressing CBS News. “I tried to be even-handed in my rulings. You don’t count the number of decisions, but in the end, I believe I gave each side a fair chance.”

The judge’s commitment to impartiality was tested repeatedly. On the day of the bomb threat, Engoron was walking his dog when he noticed police lights nearby. “There was a credible bomb threat against your house,” a lieutenant reportedly asked him. “Is there anybody else in the house?” Engoron recounted the scene, noting that the threat was ultimately deemed “unfounded” but still caused significant anxiety.

Despite the danger, the trial proceeded without interruption. Engoron returned to the bench the same day, choosing not to publicly address the incident. “It wasn’t worth disrupting the flow of the proceedings,” he explained, underscoring his focus on the legal process even amid personal risks.

Harassment Beyond the Courtroom

Trump’s campaign of intimidation escalated beyond the courtroom. In the weeks leading up to the trial, Engoron and his staff were subjected to a deluge of messages, including personal attacks and accusations of bias. One particularly notable incident occurred on the trial’s second day, when Trump falsely accused the judge’s clerk, Alison Greenfield, of being a romantic partner to Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer. He then shared a link to her Instagram account, aiming to cast doubt on her credibility.

Transcripts of threatening voicemails reveal the depth of the attacks. Over 275 pages of single-spaced calls, including those from Trump’s supporters, were recorded by the court’s Department of Public Safety. “The volume of messages was overwhelming,” a court filing stated, describing how the harassment aimed to pressure the judge into reversing his decision.

A Legacy of Courage

Engoron’s experience highlights the personal toll of high-profile legal battles. While he acknowledged the challenges, he expressed pride in his role as a jurist. “I stood by my rulings, even when it meant facing backlash,” he said. His determination to uphold the law, despite the threats, has become a symbol of judicial resilience in the face of political pressure.

As the appeals continue, Engoron’s story serves as a reminder of the risks faced by those who challenge power. The judge’s ability to maintain composure in the midst of a coordinated campaign of harassment underscores his commitment to justice. “You don’t win popularity points for being tough on the president,” he remarked, but added that the effort was worth it.

While the legal battle may not be over, Engoron’s experience has left an indelible mark on his career and personal life. The threats, though persistent, have not diminished his resolve. “I’m not afraid of the noise,” he said. “It’s part of what we do when we take on the big names in politics.”

Broader Implications for the Legal System

Engoron’s case has sparked discussions about the safety of judges in politically charged trials. The incident of the bomb threat, though not verified, reflects a pattern of intimidation seen across the country. Law enforcement officials have noted that such threats often carry political motivations, with swatting incidents and hoaxes targeting officials who oppose prominent figures.

Despite these challenges, the judge’s decision has stood as a testament to the strength of the legal system. His findings, upheld by appellate courts, highlight the importance of rigorous investigations in exposing fraudulent practices. “This case was about accountability,” Engoron said. “And I was ready to deliver it.”

As the case moves forward, Engoron remains a vocal advocate for transparency and fairness. His journey from the bench to the front lines of political conflict illustrates the personal stakes involved in high-stakes trials. For now, he continues to monitor the situation, aware that his actions have made him a target for those who see him as a threat to their influence. “I did what I believed was right,” he said. “And I stand by that.”