Jury finds Donald Trump sexually abused E. Jean Carroll in civil case

[sqwakvfr]

17 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

Not so fast Sherlock.  Regardless of whether he files an appeal, he'll still have to fork over the $5 mil....

 

[If Trump files an appeal, that would not stay the $5 million verdict against him, which Carroll can attempt to collect beginning 14 days from now. Rather, in order to obtain relief from having to pay Carroll while he appealed, Trump would have to file an appeal bond (called a “supersedeas bond”) for $5 million (plus interest at 9 percent) with the Court.

If the Court approves the bond, Carroll would not be able to collect from Trump until all appeals were exhausted. If Trump were to lose all appeals, the bond would be paid over to Carroll.]

 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/e-jean-carrolls-lawyers-leveled-a-knockout-blow-on-trump?ref=wrap

 

A bond premium is cheaper than actually writing a check.  Also, some cases get settled during the appeals process.  

[MrJ2U]

3 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

Yep, it's insane this happened. Whatever a person's feeling toward Trump is, you can't deny this is insanity.

Trump is insanity. 

[OneMoreFarang]

22 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

Does a innocent man just blow of court? Why does he feel he is above the law, as well as you believe he is above the law. 

I as an innocent man would not think that a court could find me guilty of raping a woman 30 years ago when the woman doesn't even remember the days when this supposedly happened.

Should ever man keep a diary for decades of where he was for decades just in case someday a woman will accuse him?

I wonder why this case was in court at all without any evidence. 

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I as an innocent man would not think that a court could find me guilty of raping a woman 30 years ago when the woman doesn't even remember the days when this supposedly happened.

Should ever man keep a diary for decades of where he was for decades just in case someday a woman will accuse him?

I wonder why this case was in court at all without any evidence. 

Why do you keep saying there was no evidence?

[bamnutsak]

3 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I as an innocent man would not think that a court could find me guilty

 

I would imagine that most criminal defendants say/think the same thing, so you are not alone.

 

BTW, where did you attend Law School? Pass the bar?

 

You seem to "know your stuff".

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 10, 2023 by bamnutsak

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I as an innocent man would not think that a court could find me guilty of raping a woman 30 years ago when the woman doesn't even remember the days when this supposedly happened.

Should ever man keep a diary for decades of where he was for decades just in case someday a woman will accuse him?

I wonder why this case was in court at all without any evidence. 

Sworn testimony is evidence.

 

Especially when it’s corroborated by other sworn testimony.

 

 

Edited May 10, 2023 by Chomper Higgot

[OneMoreFarang]

24 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

His statements show he is a sexual predator or can you not see that.

Yes, likely he is a sexual predator.

But that is no prove that he raped that woman or even met her.

 

If he raped any women and if there is any evidence, CCTV, witnesses, then he should be sued and if there is enough evidence then he should be found guilty. If he is a sexual predator then I guess there should be at least some evidence out there. Bring him to court, show the evidence, and I am happy to see when he is convicted. I am even more happy if he has to go to jail.

But IMHO nobody should be convicted just because of accusations - even if he is an a%##$#. 

[Chomper Higgot]

I’m getting rather tired of this ‘if they can do this to Trump they can do this to you’ argument.

 

We are accountable under law for our actions, Trump must not be an exception.

[jerrymahoney]

14 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

That isn't how the trial went down. She had contemporaneous witnesses, he refused to testify.

As neither Ms. Carroll, Ms. Martin, nor Ms. Birnbach -- all 3 at the time professional journalists -- made any written notes nor did the other 2 witnesses observe Ms. Carroll in person for any physical injury from the assault, there is really nothing to say that the 2 phone calls were not made contemporaneously but not until long after the alleged encounter with DJT.

Edited May 10, 2023 by jerrymahoney

[sqwakvfr]

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Sworn testimony is evidence.

 

Especially when it’s corroborated by other sworn testimony.

 

 

In civil court sworn witness testimony  has more value than in criminal court.   In criminal case sworn testimony is rarely enough for a unanimous conviction.  But in this case it’s was enough to convince a 9 person jury.  

[OneMoreFarang]

13 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

You seem to be taking this rather personal.  Relax, no one's coming for you.  And the rich guys out there, I doubt they're worried.  Unless they've done something in the past.  Then perhaps they should be worried.....that's a good thing.   

I wrote what I wrote as an example.

It seems many women make lots of money by accusing men.

And it this case a woman accuses a man of rape 30 years ago, and of course she wants money. 

I am happy that I am not rich. I don't have to worry that one day a women will "remember" something which could now bring her millions. 

[Chomper Higgot]

5 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Yes, likely he is a sexual predator.

But that is no prove that he raped that woman or even met her.

 

If he raped any women and if there is any evidence, CCTV, witnesses, then he should be sued and if there is enough evidence then he should be found guilty. If he is a sexual predator then I guess there should be at least some evidence out there. Bring him to court, show the evidence, and I am happy to see when he is convicted. I am even more happy if he has to go to jail.

But IMHO nobody should be convicted just because of accusations - even if he is an a%##$#. 

Trump wasn’t convicted (well not yet).

 

The jury found against him, he lost the case.

 

It is not a ‘conviction’, though there is a penalty.

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, sqwakvfr said:

In civil court sworn witness testimony  has more value than in criminal court.   In criminal case sworn testimony is rarely enough for a unanimous conviction.  But in this case it’s was enough to convince a 9 person jury.  

Nevertheless, sworn testimony is evidence.

 

The claim there was no evidence presented is nonsense.

[jvs]

3 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

It seems lots of people here are happy that Trump was convicted.

I understand that people don't like Trump and want to see him punished, any way possible.

 

But how would you react if something like this would happen to a nice celebrity? Or to your father?

An 80-year-old woman claims he raped her when she was 50. Without date when it supposedly happened, without even one witness, without evidence.

Donald was lucky compared to these cases.

https://leightonlaw.com/sex-abuse-lawyer/

[animalmagic]

1 hour ago, EVENKEEL said:

Guess all the rich old guys are on alert now. Every scorned woman will now creep forward. More to follow, wonder who's next.

Only the ones that have actually committed sexual battery or rape should worry.  Even then it depends on the evidence produced by the alleged victim shortly after the alleged crime.  The physical and mental state of an alleged victim, as demonstrated by the words and actions of the alleged victim when they make the original claim to family, friends or official persons, is admissible in a criminal or civil case.  In a civil case it is up to a jury to assess all evidence AND testimony of both parties.  In the case in question the accused, Trump, did NOT face his accuser in an attempt to demonstrate his innocence and confront his accuser by giving evidence under oath.  In civil cases, but not criminal, the jury is allowed to take this into consideration as an indication of guilt or innocence and may be reminded of it by the other party's legal representation.

[ozimoron]

8 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

As neither Ms. Carroll, Ms. Martin, nor Ms. Birnbach -- all 3 at the time professional journalists -- made any written notes nor did the other 2 witnesses observe Ms. Carroll in person for any physical injury from the assault, there is really nothing to say that the 2 phone calls were not made contemporaneously but not until long after the alleged encounter with DJT.

Do journalists walk around all day with notebooks in their hand to take notes. Do they even want to? That somebody didn't do something is really tenuous. If it was used in evidence it didn't work. There was credible evidence of an event of a sexual nature occurring between them and Trump made no defense. Simples.

[jvs]

15 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I as an innocent man would not think that a court could find me guilty of raping a woman 30 years ago when the woman doesn't even remember the days when this supposedly happened.

Should ever man keep a diary for decades of where he was for decades just in case someday a woman will accuse him?

I wonder why this case was in court at all without any evidence. 

If it would happen to me i would attend my court case and look the jury straight in the eyes.(if i was innocent)

Why did Donald not show up and now claim he was silenced by the court?

The judge even invited him  to come and testify but he chickened out.

 

[bamnutsak]

3 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Do journalists walk around all day with notebooks in their hand to take notes.

Especially when they're shopping at Bergdorf-Goodman.

 

 

 

[NextG]

24 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I as an innocent man would not think that a court could find me guilty of raping a woman 30 years ago when the woman doesn't even remember the days when this supposedly happened.

Should ever man keep a diary for decades of where he was for decades just in case someday a woman will accuse him?

I wonder why this case was in court at all without any evidence. 

Thou doth protest too much….

 

 

[metisdead]

A post with a profane reference to Trump has been removed.  This is a discussion forum, such childish antics are not permitted.

[jerrymahoney]

13 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Do journalists walk around all day with notebooks in their hand to take notes. Do they even want to?

Some do. Or at least when they get home. 

 

But as Tacopina pointed out, the lack of a date, even if true as to why the lack of a date, meant that Trump was not able to offer an alibi.

Edited May 10, 2023 by jerrymahoney

[ozimoron]

10 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Some do. Or at least when they get home. 

 

But as Tacopina pointed out, the lack of a date, even if true as to why the lack of a date, meant that Trump was not able to offer an alibi.

Alibi? He has to testify in his own defense that he wasn't there before he can claim an alibi.

[jerrymahoney]

6 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Alibi? He has to testify in his own defense that he wasn't there before he can claim an alibi.

He wasn't where when? Even if he had showed up he ,ouldn't answer that one.

 

Tacopina feels he has the grounds for an appeal. Ball is in his court.

Edited May 10, 2023 by jerrymahoney

[jvs]

17 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

But as Tacopina pointed out, the lack of a date, even if true as to why the lack of a date, meant that Trump was not able to offer an alibi.

Well i can say i never raped any one anytime!No need to pick a date.

Tacopina is not the brightest lawyer imo,loud he is but that does not work

in his favor all of the time.

[LosLobo]

54 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

But IMHO nobody should be convicted just because of accusations - even if he is an a%##$#. 

Trump was not convicted of anything, he was found liable for sexually abusing and defaming E. Jean Carroll and she was awarded $5m. 

 

This was not just because of accusations but also because of his sexual predator modus operandi, et alia.

Edited May 10, 2023 by LosLobo

[riclag]

 A New York state of mind.

. 

Not libel for raping  but libel civilly  for sexual abuse & defamation.

 

She claimed the rape took place in 

the spring of 96. Nobody could pin point a specific date! And Trump couldn’t finda alibi for the accusation.

 

But for many who support him this is part of Trumps world pre 2015 ,no big deal.It was a New York civil trial that started with rape accusations and ended that he has to pay damages for defamation and sexual abuse.

https://nypost.com/2023/05/09/trump-found-liable-for-sexual-abuse-defamation-in-e-jean-carroll-case/

 Its not finished its on appeal.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 10, 2023 by riclag

[ThaiFelix]

7 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

America is just crazy.

A 80 year old woman claims a guy raped her when she was 50. No exact date when it supposedly happened, no evidence at all.

And then, 30 years after the alleged incident, she sues the guy and gets 5 million USD.

That is nuts!

 

And at the same time, the same guy is telling rioters to storm the capitol, they do that, people die, and there are no legal consequences - at least until now.

Do we have to wait another 30 years before someone will sue him for that and demand compensation?

 

I would love to see Trump in jail and lose all his money. But this case is just laughable.

The craziest thing is the American people voted for this degenerate as POTUS!!??

[Phoenix Rising]

4 hours ago, vandeventer said:

A rape case but he wasn't charged for rape. This is justice? 5 million is a good payout better than any book sale Trumps lawyers are working on his appeal so this may never happen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOGD9UcrVW8

 

Remember the OJ case?

[Chomper Higgot]

7 minutes ago, ThaiFelix said:

The craziest thing is the American people voted for this degenerate as POTUS!!??

That’s not the crazy bit.

 

The crazy but is millions would still do so.

[ozimoron]

28 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

He wasn't where when? Even if he had showed up he ,ouldn't answer that one.

 

Tacopina feels he has the grounds for an appeal. Ball is in his court.

He only has to say he wasn't there. He declined even to do that.