jerrymahoney Posted May 4, 2023 Share Posted May 4, 2023 (edited) 29 minutes ago, placeholder said: Trump was not denied the opportunity to testify. His attorneys declined to put him on the stand. That said, the judge indicated that he would be willing to consider allowing Trump to testify despite the lateness of the hour. But if Trump's deposition is anything to go by, I doubt his attorneys would actually want to put him on the stand. Unless they believe that their case has gone so badly that they feel they have nothing to lose. Just my speculation. What I said specifically is that Trump was being denied the right to offer an alibi defense as no specific date for the alleged event has ever been offered. The original complaint as filed with the Court only states that: One evening between the fall of 1995 and the spring of 1996 ... Edited May 4, 2023 by jerrymahoney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozimoron Posted May 6, 2023 Share Posted May 6, 2023 On 5/5/2023 at 6:46 AM, jerrymahoney said: What I said specifically is that Trump was being denied the right to offer an alibi defense as no specific date for the alleged event has ever been offered. The original complaint as filed with the Court only states that: One evening between the fall of 1995 and the spring of 1996 ... Trump doesn't want to do anything except lie to his base. Hours after former President Donald Trump told reporters in Ireland that he’d fly back to New York to “confront” E. Jean Carroll in her civil rape and defamation case against him, his attorney emphatically denied to a federal judge that his client would testify. “I know you understand what I am dealing with,” Trump’s attorney Joe Tacopina told Senior U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan during a sidebar conference on Thursday. https://lawandcrime.com/live-trials/e-jean-carroll-rape-suit/behind-scenes-trumps-lawyer-disavowed-clients-claim-hed-confront-e-jean-carroll-to-judge-you-understand-what-i-am-dealing-with/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
placeholder Posted May 6, 2023 Share Posted May 6, 2023 57 minutes ago, ozimoron said: Trump doesn't want to do anything except lie to his base. Hours after former President Donald Trump told reporters in Ireland that he’d fly back to New York to “confront” E. Jean Carroll in her civil rape and defamation case against him, his attorney emphatically denied to a federal judge that his client would testify. “I know you understand what I am dealing with,” Trump’s attorney Joe Tacopina told Senior U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan during a sidebar conference on Thursday. https://lawandcrime.com/live-trials/e-jean-carroll-rape-suit/behind-scenes-trumps-lawyer-disavowed-clients-claim-hed-confront-e-jean-carroll-to-judge-you-understand-what-i-am-dealing-with/ Even his lawyer acknowledges the unreliability of Trump's statements. And this underscores why E. Jean Carroll even has a case. Trump has a long history of lies and misleading statements. So the jury is going to have to reckon with who is more believable. Or, at least, if Trump is believable enough. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozimoron Posted May 6, 2023 Share Posted May 6, 2023 36 minutes ago, placeholder said: Even his lawyer acknowledges the unreliability of Trump's statements. And this underscores why E. Jean Carroll even has a case. Trump has a long history of lies and misleading statements. So the jury is going to have to reckon with who is more believable. Or, at least, if Trump is believable enough. And the jury must find for one of the parties on the balance of probabilities, not reasonable doubt. Who they believe will be crucial. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerrymahoney Posted May 6, 2023 Share Posted May 6, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, ozimoron said: And the jury must find for one of the parties on the balance of probabilities, not reasonable doubt. Who they believe will be crucial. Yes the burden of proof in a criminal trial is evidence 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. The burden of proof in a civil trial is 'the preponderance of the evidence To which Tapicano in his summation might say: What evidence? Just a bunch of girl talk without one tangible piece of evidence. How does my client prove a negative? Ms. Carroll's attorney in their own original complaint form said this all allegedly happened (quote) "One evening between the fall of 1995 and the spring of 1996 ..." What is that -- a joke? Edited May 6, 2023 by jerrymahoney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now