Rudy Giuliani has decided not to testify at his contempt hearing, where a judge will determine whether to hold him in contempt for repeatedly ignoring court orders. The case involves Georgia election workers Ruby Freeman and Wandrea “Shay” Moss, who are litigating the collection of a $148 million judgment awarded to them after Giuliani defamed them during his efforts to challenge the 2020 election results.
Giuliani’s attorney, Joseph Cammarata, submitted a request to allow Giuliani to appear virtually at the hearing, citing medical issues, including knee problems and lung issues stemming from his exposure at the World Trade Center site after the September 11 attacks. Cammarata acknowledged that, should the request be granted, Giuliani would not testify in person.
The plaintiffs’ attorneys, representing Freeman and Moss, responded by indicating that if Giuliani chose not to testify, they would have no objection to his virtual appearance. However, they made it clear that if he did not testify, he should not later claim that he was denied a fair opportunity to present his case. They also emphasized that if Giuliani was granted the ability to appear virtually, they would insist on the opportunity to cross-examine him in person if he had testified.
The plaintiffs’ legal team made a pointed remark, stating that if Giuliani chose not to testify, he should not be allowed to later argue that the proceedings were unfair. They also noted that they had no position on whether Giuliani should be allowed to appear virtually, leaving the decision up to the court’s discretion.
Giuliani’s failure to comply with court orders has been a major issue throughout the litigation. He has repeatedly missed filing deadlines and failed to turn over required documents. U.S. District Judge Lewis J. Liman had previously expressed frustration with Giuliani’s disregard for court instructions, ordering him to appear in person at the January 3 hearing. Judge Liman had signaled that he was likely to find Giuliani in contempt due to his continued failure to provide the necessary information for discovery, despite multiple court orders.
The case has raised significant questions about the accountability of public figures and the consequences of disregarding legal obligations. Judge Liman has made it clear that the law imposes consequences for those who ignore their legal responsibilities, and he has indicated that Giuliani’s actions may lead to sanctions.
As the hearing approaches, the court will also consider whether, in addition to holding Giuliani in contempt, further sanctions should be imposed. The outcome of this hearing could have significant ramifications for Giuliani, both in terms of his legal obligations and his public reputation.
This case highlights the ongoing legal challenges faced by Giuliani as he continues to defend himself against claims related to his actions during the post-election period. The plaintiffs, Freeman and Moss, have been steadfast in their pursuit of justice, seeking to hold Giuliani accountable for the harm caused by his defamatory statements. With the court preparing to make a decision on the contempt issue, Giuliani’s decision not to testify may further complicate his legal situation.
