The conclusion of Donald Trump's New York business fraud trial this week marked the culmination of its most intense phase. High-profile members of his family sequentially appeared in Lower Manhattan, responding to thorough questioning from prosecutors.

Starting Monday, Trump's defense team is poised to present their case, calling the former president's eldest son as their initial witness. Nevertheless, legal experts suggest that after two weeks of damaging testimonies from the Trump family, rescuing their case will be an exceedingly difficult task.

Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor and president of West Coast Trial Lawyers, described the trial as a legal disaster. He thinks that Trump is poised to face a substantial defeat in this case.

In the event of the worst-case scenario for Trump, Judge Arthur Engoron might prohibit him and his co-defendants from engaging in business activities in New York, along with imposing penalties amounting to at least $250 million (£204 million).

The most detrimental testimony seems to have come directly from Trump himself. His statements, where he referred to New York Attorney General Letitia James as a "political hack," labeled the case "a disgrace," and personally criticized Judge Engoron, appeared to significantly harm his position.

Judge Engoron, in various instances, urged Trump's lawyers to control his conduct and respond to the questions posed. He warned of drawing negative inferences if they failed to comply.

Mitchell Epner, an attorney specializing in commercial litigation, remarked that if Trump were anyone other than a person under Secret Service protection, he might have been held in contempt of court.

When Trump did respond to the prosecutors' questions, his answers seemed to further undermine his defense. The crux of the attorney general's lawsuit revolves around documents known as statements of financial condition. Allegedly, these documents, used by the Trump Organization to secure loans and insurance, were inflated fraudulently.

The judge had already determined these documents to be false and is now deliberating on whether there was an intent to defraud, personal gain, and related charges. The judge's decisions will encompass potential penalties and their severity.

On the stand, Mr Trump boasted that his properties like Mar-a-Lago and 40 Wall Street were worth more than their value on paper, but acknowledged he believed at least one of his properties may have been overvalued.

At another point, a prosecutor questioned him about the size of his Trump Tower penthouse, which the company had claimed was over 30,000 sq ft but took up just over 10,000. Mr Trump first acknowledged he had believed the claimed square footage was "high" - but then began to throw around larger estimates of its size.

Throughout his testimony, Mr. Trump admitted he had given his input, and that some of those paper values were wrong.

But he insisted that even if he did offer this input, he did not direct his accountants or employees on what valuations to use.

Mr. Trump denies any wrongdoing and has accused the New York attorney general of waging a campaign of political persecution against him.

Speaking to reporters after Mr Trump testified, his attorney Alina Habba said he had "built a great company, it's worth a ton more than that statement of financial condition."

She added that Ms James, the attorney general, "doesn't know how to get out of it because her politics won't allow her."

His children, Donald Trump Jr, Eric Trump, and Ivanka Trump, were more composed in their testimony and took a different approach than their father. But they did not necessarily help the family's case.

Each one, in their way, attempted to deflect the responsibility for the false documents onto the company's accountants and lawyers.

Mr Trump Jr said he was unfamiliar with the standard accounting guidelines to which companies like his must adhere. Eric Trump testified he was not involved with the creation of the statements of financial condition. Both are executive vice presidents at the Trump Organization.

They stuck to this defence even as they were presented with various emails they sent or were copied on, or documents they signed, that contained information based on the false financial statements.

When confronted with emails that showed her discussing the terms of a loan Deutsche Bank was about to grant her father for a real estate project, Ms Trump stated she could not recall the exchanges.

Her declarations were unlikely to help, Mr Rahmani said. Mr. Trump Jr and Eric Trump were "still liable for some of the claims like financial fraud, even if they didn't have intent", he observed.

And, he added, the Trump Organization was liable for the actions of Donald Trump and his sons in the course of their employment.

Legal experts agreed Mr Trump's defense team, led by veteran attorney Chris Kise, will be starting on the back foot next week.

They could attempt to introduce reams of new evidence or continue to prod and goad Judge Engoron to give them grounds for an appeal.

The lawyers spent the last few weeks attacking the judge over his alleged lack of impartiality. Other accusations of bias launched against Judge Engoron's clerk led to angry reprimands from the bench and a gag order on the attorneys themselves.

"I'm sure the judge will rule against me because he always rules against me," Mr Trump said at one point on Monday.

Despite the aggressive attacks, experts told the BBC that Mr Trump's legal team had failed to undermine the state's case.

"The defense needs someone to get up there and justify these valuations," Mr Rahmani said. "Accountants, CPAs, real estate experts, appraisers. And they just haven't done that yet."

At this point, they face an uphill battle in salvaging their case, analysts told the BBC.

"The reason that they are in such a bad situation is that the judge has already found that the most important documents in this case were all false," Mr Epner said. "As of now, the judge has also been given an enormous amount of evidence to show that they were knowingly false, and provided with the intent to defraud."

"Since they don't have the ability to get into a Back to the Future DeLorean and turn back time," Mr. Epner said of the defense team, "I can't imagine what they can do to turn around this case."