Hunter Biden walks to board Air Force One at John F. Kennedy International Airport in March 2024 (AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File).
The federal judge who will preside over Hunter Biden’s tax trial in California issued a written ruling Tuesday spelling out why he granted the special counsel a series of motion wins, whether on expert witnesses or the claimed family tragedy causes of the defendant’s addiction. It’s still unknown, however, whether he’ll allow in evidence of the defendant’s campaign to influence the U.S. on behalf of a Romanian real estate “tycoon” who faced a corruption probe while his father Joe Biden was vice president.
U.S. District Judge Mark Scarsi one week ago orally decided 11 motions, seven by special counsel David Weiss and four from Hunter Biden, largely granting the government’s asks and in a couple of places putting up roadblocks for the defense.
The written ruling began by siding with the prosecution and entirely disallowing one proposed defense expert witness on the subject of substance abuse, Dr. Joshua Lee, based on “deficiencies in […] expert disclosure and supplemental disclosure” that gave the special counsel “insufficient information regarding what Dr. Lee’s opinions about the facts of this case are and the bases for those opinions.”
The judge left up in the air whether a second potential expert witness, former IRS criminal investigator Thomas Bishop, can testify on three topics, reserving a ruling.
At the same time, Scarsi wrote that Bishop “shall not provide expert testimony” on host tax-related topics.
Further down in the order, the judge sided with the prosecution’s motion to exclude “evidence of the causes of Mr. Biden’s prior addiction as irrelevant.”
“The fact that Mr. Biden was intoxicated or had an addiction during the timeframe charged in the Indictment is relevant to his defense. But Mr. Biden has not advanced an argument as to why the underlying causes of the addiction are relevant,” the judge said, adding shortly thereafter: “As such, evidence of the causes of Mr. Biden’s addiction is irrelevant, and neither party may elicit such evidence or refer to any alleged causes of Mr. Biden’s addiction in the opening statements.”
Scarsi noted that defense “apparently intend[ed] to argue” the tragic 1972 Biden family car crash that killed Biden’s mother Neilia and his 1-year-old sister Naomi and the 2015 death of his brother Beau Biden from cancer “caused” his addiction.
“As two specifically alleged causes for Mr. Biden’s professed addiction arose during the argument, the Court briefly addresses them. Counsel for Mr. Biden apparently intends to argue that a tragic car accident in 1972 was the cause for Mr. Biden’s addiction from 2015 through 2019,” the judge said. “For the reasons expressed elsewhere in this Order, the Court excludes this argument and any reference to the 1972 accident. Counsel for Mr. Biden also intends to argue that the death of Mr. Biden’s brother caused Mr. Biden’s addiction. Again, the Court precludes this argument.”
The judge cautioned that witnesses would still be able to testify on Biden’s “frequency of drug use during the relevant time period or any other relevant events that took place.”
Near the end of the order, Biden was handed a win, as the judge mostly walled off the prosecution from injecting political intrigue into the trial, only reserving ruling whether to keep out evidence Biden “acted on behalf of a foreign principal to influence U.S. policy and public opinion.”
Read the Tuesday order here.
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
