Judge blasts Rudy Giuliani’s ‘farcical’ excuse for not turning over assets in defamation case

A federal judge chastised Rudy Giuliani on Thursday for giving a “farcical” explanation for why he has failed to comply with a court order to turn over valuables to former Georgia election workers he slandered after the 2020 presidential election.

U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman made the remark in a New York courtroom after Giuliani’s attorney argued that the former mayor was not sure where some of his belongings are.

“The notion that your client has no knowledge of where his assets are located is farcical,” Liman told Giuliani attorney Ken Caruso.

Giuliani, a one-time personal attorney for President Donald Trump, had been ordered to turn over personal assets “including cash accounts, jewelry and valuables” to former campaign workers Ruby Freeman and her daughter Shaye Moss by Oct. 29 to begin complying with a $146 million defamation judgment against him.

The judge ordered Thursday’s hearing after attorneys for Freeman and Moss said Giuliani had failed to turn over any of the items he was specifically ordered to surrender, which include a signed Joe DiMaggio shirt, a luxury watch collection and jewelry.

Attorney Aaron Nathan said that when they entered Giuliani’s New York apartment last week, they found the valuables and some furniture had been removed.

Giuliani told reporters Thursday that “they lied” about items being moved.

In a lawsuit, Nathan noted that a property listing for the $5.7 million apartment Giuliani is to turn over to Freeman and Moss had shown the framed DiMaggio jersey hanging in the living room. He compared it to a picture taken on October 31 when they entered the apartment, showing the shirt and several other items were no longer there.

“There’s been nothing but games,” Nathan said at Thursday’s hearing.

Giuliani maintains the items have always been where he says they are: in his Palm Beach and New York homes and a warehouse in Ronkonkoma, Long Island, to which he claims he does not have access.

He has also said that he is not sure exactly what assets he still has and where they may be. Nathan retracted that claim in a lawsuit, calling it “breathtaking” since the list of items came from Giuliani’s own disclosures this year in his now-dismissed bankruptcy case.

In court, Caruso tried to argue that there were two items that Giuliani should not hand over – a 1980 Mercedes that formerly belonged to Hollywood icon Lauren Bacall and a watch that belonged to Giuliani’s grandfather.

Speaking about the lawsuit to reporters before Thursday’s hearing, Giuliani said “the law says” Freeman and Moss “aren’t entitled to much of” what they’re seeking.

“For example, they want my grandfather’s watch. It’s 150 years old. It’s a bit of an heirloom. You don’t usually get those unless you’re involved in a political persecution,” Giuliani said.

In court, Caruso told the judge it was “vindictive” of Freeman and Moss to ask for the watch, a claim the judge angrily shot down.

Liman said he regularly presides over cases where debtors large and small must hand over family heirlooms.

“If they owe a debt, they must pay a debt. It doesn’t matter if it was said,” Liman said.

Caruso also argued that his client should be able to keep the Mercedes — which Giuliani took to Trump’s Florida polling place on Election Day — saying it was worth less than $4,000.

The judge denied that request and ordered Giuliani to hand over the title and keys to the car in the coming days.

“All property must be turned over to the receiver, and if not I will hold him in contempt,” the judge said of Giuliani.

After court, Giuliani told reporters, “I will hand over everything that I am legally required to hand over … They have been less clear.”

Lawyers for Freeman and Moss noted that both the car and the watch were explicitly mentioned in the judge’s order 22 Oct order.

Giuliani was hit with the massive monetary judgment last year after a judge found him responsible for repeatedly defaming Freeman and Moss with his accusations that the pair committed fraud during the 2020 election.

Giuliani’s claims were investigated and found to be without merit, but he has not retracted them.

“I did not defame them,” he told reporters Thursday.