jerrymahoney

But in the meantime: Are the Courts Likely to Sustain the $65 Million in Punitive Damages Awarded Against Trump in the E. Jean Carroll Defamation Case? January 26, 2024, 2:08 pm To begin with, there’s the question whether the compensatory damages will stand. If they are found to be excessive, then the punitive damages would likely be gone as well, and a new trial on both damages held. I don’t have an opinion on the excessiveness of the compensatory damages because I did not pay close enough attention to the evidence at this latest trial. But the punitive damages question presents different issues. Apart from any state court review, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that punitive damages sometimes are unconstitutional under the due process clause and require independent review (one of the leading cases here is State Farm v. Campbell). ... It’s fairly common for a jury to award very high punitive damages to a rich defendant who has engaged in egregious conduct, only to see the punitive award lowered either by the trial court or on appeal. We’ll see what happens, but the full $65 million in punitive damages is uncertain to stand. https://electionlawblog.org/?p=140964

Just to note, I had CIGNA Global with HQ in Scotland for 5 years. No claims. This was from my 2018 policy:

Sure. But you aren't one of them.

Per Judge Kaplan:

You should let them know -- maybe they will hurry it up.

I get lots of interrogations. And when it's "Let me ask you a question I often these days feel like saying: Take your question and do a Vern Unsworth with it.

This ain't no <deleted> crossd-exam

I see -- so you now wouldn't be screaming to high heaven to get your DNA included if you were innocent but charged with a crime. And the sample was not sperm. But the trial is over. What seems to be at issue in the appeal, in this area, is not the DNA per se but that the Judge allowed the motion by Carroll to exclude any mention of her extra-judicial comments on the DNA. **************** Trump rape case: After years of back and forth over Trump's DNA, jurors won't even hear about it Mar 28, 2023, 3:26 AM GMT+7 The judge presiding over E. Jean Carroll's rape and defamation lawsuit against former President Donald Trump has banned lawyers from even mentioning DNA evidence in front of the jury when the case goes to trial next month. US District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan ruled Monday that both sides would be "precluded from any testimony, argument, commentary or reference concerning DNA evidence" during the trial, which is scheduled to begin April 25. While DNA evidence was thrown out of the case, Trump's lawyers continued to fight for the chance to question Carroll about her comments insinuating she had DNA evidence to prove her sexual-assault claim. In 2021, Carroll tweeted about Trump's mounting legal issues, writing, "Cyrus Vance, the Manhattan District Attorney, has Trump's taxes. Fani Willis, the Georgia Prosecutor, has Trump's phone call. Mary Trump has her grandfather's will. And I have the dress. Trump is basically in deep <deleted>." She also acknowledged in her deposition that she publicly claimed to have Trump's DNA. https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-rape-case-lawyers-banned-from-speaking-about-dna-judge-rules-2023-3

February deposit received. Have a nice day, Mr. Merry Mailman

ADDENDUM to the above: How Forensic DNA Evidence Can Lead to Wrongful Convictions Forensic DNA evidence has been a game-changer for law enforcement, but research shows it can contribute to miscarriages of justice. In criminal investigation, DNA evidence can be a game-changer. But DNA is just one piece of the puzzle, rarely giving a clear “he did it” answer. According to a consortium of forensic experts who released a report earlier this year, there are limits to what DNA can tell us about a crime. And what it can and can’t reliably prove in court needs to be much clearer. ... Telling a jury it is implausible that anyone besides the suspect would have the same DNA test results is seldom, if ever, justified,” the report states. ... The lesson of all this research: DNA evidence is a powerful tool in criminal investigation and prosecution, but it must be used with care. It should never be oversold in court, and it should only ever be considered in light of other available evidence. https://daily.jstor.org/forensic-dna-evidence-can-lead-wrongful-convictions/ And a note on Robbie Kaplan, Ms. Carroll's lead attorney: Kaplan successfully argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on behalf of LGBT rights activist Edith Windsor, in United States v. Windsor, a landmark decision that invalidated a section of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act and required the federal government to recognize same-sex marriages. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberta_Kaplan

How Your DNA—or Someone Else’s—Can Send You to Jail Although DNA is individual to you—a “fingerprint” of your genetic code—DNA samples don’t always tell a complete story. The DNA samples used in criminal prosecutions are generally of low quality, making them particularly complicated to analyze. They are not very concentrated, not very complete, or are a mixture of multiple individuals’ DNA—and often, all of these conditions are true. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/05/how-your-dna-or-someone-elses-can-send-you-jail And from my post above: < “Her counsel have had plenty of opportunities in both of the two related cases to move to compel Mr. Trump to submit a DNA sample,” (Judge) Kaplan wrote. “Had they done so, they almost certainly would have gotten it. But Ms. Carroll’s counsel never moved to compel Mr. Trump to submit a DNA sample. They obviously decided to go to trial without it.” So why did Carroll's attorneys decide not to compel a DNA sample?

The whole issue of DNA lab reports in or out will likely not be an issue of appeal. The exclusion of Ms. Carroll's extra-judicial comments about DNA likely will.

So we know from the AN Vox Populai why Trump would not want the DNA in the case. (because he's guilty) What was Carroll's strategic reason? And I'll respond to others post or queries when I feel like it or not.

In other words, you don't know.

UPDATED WED, FEB 15 202311:52 AM EST < The judge noted that Carroll would not be entitled now to get a DNA sample from Trump, because the process of exchanging evidence, known as discovery, is completed. < “Her counsel have had plenty of opportunities in both of the two related cases to move to compel Mr. Trump to submit a DNA sample,” Kaplan wrote. “Had they done so, they almost certainly would have gotten it. But Ms. Carroll’s counsel never moved to compel Mr. Trump to submit a DNA sample. They obviously decided to go to trial without it.” The Carroll team had 3 years to 'compel' Trump to submit DNA but did not do so. So maybe they were the ones who didn't want the DNA because at best the results would be inconclusive. And it was the Carroll team who provided the motion that DNA not not to be discussed in any way at the trial. And was not. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/15/judge-rejects-trump-offer-of-dna-sample-in-carroll-rape-defamation-case.html This is the kind of info the Carroll motion had omitted from the trial: 5. The Donna Karan blazer dress she claims to have worn during the alleged incident was not even available at the time of her claims. Trump Attorney Boris Epshteyn told reporters, “She said, ‘This is the dress I wore in 1994.’ They went back, they checked. The dress wasn’t even made in 1994.” https://twitter(dot)com/OwenGregorian/status/1751608969724850669

And you called out an ultra leftist magazine for publishing a rightwing pearl clutching job.

How eviscerating in 3 words. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elie_Honig

So as to multiple questions how any of this could affect a fair trial: THE LAW FEB. 2, 2024 Fani Willis Has Problems (Upon Problems) By Elie Honig, a former federal and state prosecutor and a contributor to CAFE After these allegations surfaced, Willis somehow made it worse still. Prosecutors love to proclaim that “we do our talking in court” (preferably accompanied by a dramatic lowering of the sunglasses over the eyes). This is more than a catchphrase. It’s an affirmation of the core duty to protect the defendant’s liberty interests and the integrity of our criminal process. Indeed, under the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct (and pretty much every other professional code), prosecutors must “refrain from making extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused.” Yet Willis did just that. Days after Trump’s co-defendant filed the motion relating to Wade, Willis responded not in a court filing but in a speech from the pulpit of a historic Black church on Martin Luther King Jr. Day with the cameras rolling. Willis told the assembled congregation (and the general public) that the defendants had raised allegations about Wade — criminal defendants are entitled to make motions, by the way — because of Wade’s race. These public comments by the district attorney are anathema to prosecutorial ethics and fair practice. Willis, who is enormously popular in Fulton County — she received over 71 percent of the Democratic primary vote in 2020, then ran unopposed in the general election — publicly calls the defense teams in her highest-profile case racist. What could outrage a potential jury pool more than that? Various judges have slapped pretrial gag orders on Trump in his other cases to prevent him from making inflammatory public statements outside of court that could prejudice the jury pool. Now Willis has done exactly that. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2024/02/fani-willis-has-problems-upon-problems.html

Maybe not to those who actually matter meaning the black legal community: Late last year, the digital publication The Root named Ms. Willis No. 1 on its list of the 100 most influential Black Americans, and feted her at a ceremony at the Apollo Theater in Harlem. Then, after the allegations emerged last month, The Root published an article criticizing Ms. Willis for poor judgment, even as it said that Black people in high-profile positions were held to harsher standards than their white counterparts. “We all love Willis here at The Root, which is why she got the top spot at last month’s The Root 100 ceremony,” the article stated. “But she absolutely should’ve known better than to put herself in this position.” https://archive.is/v1Heh

US Embassy received passport application 12 DEC Received the approval notice New passport dated passport dated 21 DEC 2023 Received new passport 05 JAN 2024

Go ahead. And then you ask 4.

The only evidence that matters is the evidence that is admitted at trial. FEDERAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CIVIL CASES COURT’S PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTION “B” WHAT IS EVIDENCE The evidence you are to consider in deciding the facts of the case are: First, the sworn testimony of any witness; and Second, the exhibits that are admitted in evidence; and Third, any facts to which the parties agree. https://www.hid.uscourts.gov/cms/assets/c469aec9-f838-4845-ac11-44df5700d995/JMS August 7 2023 Civ Jury Instrs.pdf

2022 Georgia Code Title 16 - Crimes and Offenses Chapter 10 - Offenses Against Public Administration Article 2 - Obstruction of Public Administration and Related Offenses § 16-10-20. False Statements and Writings, Concealment of Facts, and Fraudulent Documents in Matters Within Jurisdiction of State or Political Subdivisions Universal Citation: GA Code § 16-10-20 (2022) A person who knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; makes a false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or makes or uses any false writing or document, knowing the same to contain any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry, in any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of state government or of the government of any county, city, or other political subdivision of this state shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by a fine of not more than $1,000.00 or by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than five years, or both.

Go ahead.

To be clear: nothing in the current accusations impacts Trump's right to a fair trial. My feeling is that Wade needs to resign to defuse the PR issue, however. If he could be replaced. I would say only the mechanics of the charges in the Georgia Trump trial are in play. But the greatest chance for any criminal sanctions may come from the Fulton County Auditor “To date, Fulton District Attorney Fani Willis has been non-responsive to the requests for information which I made of her in my capacity as Chair of the Audit Committee of Fulton County on January 19, 2024,” Ellis said in a statement given to the DCNF. “Despite multiple follow-up requests for this information which should be made available for public review and consumption, the District Attorney has provided no response to our County Auditor or me as to when this information will be provided.” https://dailycaller.com/2024/02/02/fani-willis-still-hasnt-responded-to-commissioners-request-for-information-relating-to-alleged-misuse-of-funds/