Trump faces trial for advice columnist's rape claim

[Social Media]

Former President Donald Trump is facing a civil trial over an allegation that he raped an advice columnist nearly three decades ago.

Jury selection is due to begin on Tuesday in a New York federal court.

Mr Trump has denied E Jean Carroll's accusation that he attacked her in a Manhattan department store. He has said she made up the claim for publicity.

Though this is not a criminal case, the consequences for Mr Trump could nevertheless be serious.

If Ms Carroll wins the lawsuit, it would be the first time the former president - who has been the subject of more than two dozen such allegations - would be found legally responsible for a sexual assault.

Mr Trump is facing a wave of other legal troubles, including more than two dozen felony counts over payment of hush money to an adult film actress and an investigation into his alleged role in the US Capitol riot on 6 January 2021.

 

Mr Trump is also juggling his ongoing bid for the White House next year.

Here's what to expect at the trial.

[OneMoreFarang]

I think it's ridiculous if any man, even if it is Trump, has to stand trial because of an accusation about something which the accuser claims happened 30 years or so ago.

Why didn't she complain in the weeks or maybe months after it happened?

 

It seems Trump had sex with many women, just like many guys in Thailand. How many of you remember every woman you ever had sex with? And when that happened and where? 

If some women would now complain about what I did 25 years ago the chance is low that I remember her, even if she would show me a picture of her from that time. The chance is even lower that I remember if we had sex and where?

 

Trump is accused of so many serious crimes. Why don't the persecutors concentrate on the important cases to lock him up?

With cases like this one or that payment to the porn actor nobody should be surprised if Trump fans complain that this is a witch hunt.

Lock him up for treason for the rest of his life. Case closed.

[mikebike]

4 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I think it's ridiculous if any man, has to stand trial because of an accusation about something which the accuser claims happened 30 years or so ago.

So you were against the Nazi war crimes arrests and trials some of which were accused 45+ yrs after their crimes. Interesting. 

 

When, in your opinion does a crime stop being a crime? 5 yrs? 10 yrs? 20 yrs?

 

Shouldn't the crime be judged by the evidence, not the time passed? 

[bendejo]

He's building his own rap sheet, as they call it on TV cop shows (when I was a teen it was "a record").  Law enforcement sees someone with a sheet with different eyes than a potential first offender.

This case is not about rape, it's about how, instead of simply denying the rape charges and then KEEPING HIS DAMN MOUTH SHUT he went all Don Rickles on her.  Maybe good for a laugh at Maga rallies but that's about it. 

Same thing with the Bragg case in NYC, Bragg himself said it is about the obstruction of investigation of another crime, which is itself a crime.  That crime has not been clarified, so, they're still no where near out of first gear yet.  From what hints come out of the Smith investigation it looks like he's going at the former regime from an all-encompassing perspective.  No more of this trying to prosecute isolated acts, like the two impeachments.