The letter in the 2nd post was the request to Judge Kaplan for a mistrial. This is one of the instances of the appeal regarding evidence as admissible or not so.

 

BTW

 

E. Jean Carroll’s lawyer Roberta Kaplan said Wednesday that former President Trump has “absolutely zero” grounds for an appeal after a jury found that he defamed Carroll and is liable for sexual abuse of her.

 

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3997968-e-jean-carroll-lawyer-says-trump-has-absolutely-zero-grounds-for-appeal/

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/05/05/trump-rape-trial-witness-tracker-00095179

3 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

The letter in the 2nd post was the request to Judge Kaplan for a mistrial. This is one of the instances of the appeal regarding evidence as admissible or not so.

 

BTW

 

E. Jean Carroll’s lawyer Roberta Kaplan said Wednesday that former President Trump has “absolutely zero” grounds for an appeal after a jury found that he defamed Carroll and is liable for sexual abuse of her.

 

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3997968-e-jean-carroll-lawyer-says-trump-has-absolutely-zero-grounds-for-appeal/

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/05/05/trump-rape-trial-witness-tracker-00095179

Interesting post....

 

Tacopina argued that if Carroll’s interactions with Trump upon entering the store were true, they would have been captured on video and "would have significantly corroborated her story."

I would suggest that Kaplin, a veteran federal judge with a no-nonsense reputation as with his contemporaries, uses reasoning and logic for adjudication of his cases.

 

Tacopina's argument assumes that because something has not been proven, it must be false.

 

This is an 'Appeal to Ignorance' illogical fallacy. 

The absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence. 

Possibly this may be one of the reasons why the mis-trial request failed.

 

As you have previously stated 'tough to prove the negative'.

 

On 1/21/2024 at 11:16 AM, jerrymahoney said:

Yes. Tough to prove the negative.

 

Judge denies Trump attorneys' motion for mistrial in E. Jean Carroll civil case - UPI.com

1 minute ago, LosLobo said:

Interesting post....

 

Tacopina argued that if Carroll’s interactions with Trump upon entering the store were true, they would have been captured on video and "would have significantly corroborated her story."

I would suggest that Kaplin, a veteran federal judge with a no-nonsense reputation as with his contemporaries, uses reasoning and logic for adjudication of his cases.

 

Tacopina's argument assumes that because something has not been proven, it must be false.

 

This is an 'Appeal to Ignorance' illogical fallacy. 

The absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence. 

Possibly this may be one of the reasons why the mis-trial request failed.

 

As you have previously stated 'tough to prove the negative'.

 

 

Judge denies Trump attorneys' motion for mistrial in E. Jean Carroll civil case - UPI.com

So, because Trump could not prove it did not happen, he was found guilty. That makes sense. 

5 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So, because Trump could not prove it did not happen, he was found guilty. That makes sense. 

He wasn’t found guilty, he was found liable .

 

The Jury made that decision having sat through the trial.

Off topic obfuscation posts and replies contravening our Community Standards have been removed.  Posts with trolling references to Trump were removed as well. 

15 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   That is assets , its not money sitting in the bank 

So sell the assets and quit begging for maga minions to keep sending more as he has done for past 8 or so years since announcing that he is very very rich and doesn't need anyones $$.

 

  He no doubt will appeal and appeal and delay and delay as that is his tactic to try and avoid being held accountable for crimes....if he is as he claims so innocent then why does he not want all the cases to go to trial asap so he can be found not guilty and ride into a second term on a white horse...

 

gee reckon maybe he could actually be guilty or is all that massive pile of evidence in the felony cases just made up...and all those republicans who testified against him must just be making things up as to testify against him even though to do so will no doubt result in death threats and worse ...and all those documents, emails, text messages, video and audio tapes i guess were all provided by space lasers ?

 

come on donnie...man up and quit the BS delays and stupid motions ...face the jury and lets see what they have to say after looking at ALL the evidence and making a decision....but of course we all know that any verdict other than innocent was the result of a rigged jury and will have trump once again whining and blaming everyone except himself...hell he is still claiming he won the election in 2020 in spite of having NO EVIDENCE going on 4 years later...so let's see in one case NO evidence, in other cases tons of evidence....but yet trumpers think a jury should ignore the evidence in one case but agree that NO evidence is a good reason to believe the big LIE...jurors are not as stupid as trump wants them to be.

22 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

 

This is an 'Appeal to Ignorance' illogical fallacy. 

Maybe so. However Carroll's Lawyer Ms.. Kaplan has yet to respond to the appeal after 2 continuances even though she says the appeal is a slam dunk loser.

44 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Maybe so. However Carroll's Lawyer Ms.. Kaplan has yet to respond to the appeal after 2 continuances even though she says the appeal is a slam dunk loser.

To be fair, Carroll’s lawyers have been busy dealing with the continuing flow of defamation coming out of Trump, which they are placing before the court.

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-e-jean-carroll-defamation-rape-trial-more-evidence-2024-1?amp

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

To be fair, Carroll’s lawyers have been busy dealing with the continuing flow of defamation coming out of Trump, which they are placing before the court.

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-e-jean-carroll-defamation-rape-trial-more-evidence-2024-1?amp

No problem. The Court granted the stay for reasons not stated. March 30 reply is due.

6 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

No problem. The Court granted the stay for reasons not stated. March 30 reply is due.

Meanwhile the evidence against Trump piles up.

 

Trump is very helpful that way.

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Meanwhile the evidence against Trump piles up.

 

Trump is very helpful that way.

Maybe but an appeal does not generally allow new evidence to be introduced.

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

So, because Trump could not prove it did not happen, he was found guilty. That makes sense. 

He was found liable, I suggest likely due to a preponderance of evidence from:

• Credible consistent witness testimony
• The inference of 450 instances of pleading the fifth
• A confusing response about never meeting E. Jean Carroll
• A modus operandi of other sexual assault cases, possibly not advanced because of intimidation
• His Hollywood access tapes
• Refusing a DNA test
• Not personally attending his own trial

Obviously, these did not work in Trump's favour with the jury.

 

1 minute ago, jerrymahoney said:

Maybe but an appeal does not generally allow new evidence to be introduced.

It certainly doesn’t stop new evidence piling up.

 

Trump is working had at just that.

1 hour ago, LosLobo said:

Obviously, these did not work in Trump's favour with the jury.

As in any case, the jury verdict is a function of the evidence that the Judge allowed and disallowed. An appeal -- at least in part -- can bring into question some of those decisions based upon adjudicated precedent and/or rules of procedure including Federal Rules of Evidence.

On 1/21/2024 at 8:43 AM, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   I suppose that you've not considered that Trump  may actually have no recollection of ever meeting her ?

I don't have enough time to consider every possible remote possibility connected with this case. I have to go with the facts. Or, Trump’s own words:

 

"I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. ... Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do anything."

10 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

Maybe but an appeal does not generally allow new evidence to be introduced.

I am not sure about NY state law, but typically, appeals are about the law, not the facts.

1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:

I don't have enough time to consider every possible remote possibility connected with this case. I have to go with the facts. Or, Trump’s own words:

 

"I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. ... Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do anything."

He said they let you do it. How is that rape? 

Just now, Danderman123 said:

I am not sure about NY state law, but typically, appeals are about the law, not the facts.

Yeah, in NY, facts don't seem to matter a whit when it comes to Trump. 

For you Trump cult followers, does it really make any difference if Trump did it or not? Don't you think that any woman should be happy that Trump chose her?

2 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

He said they let you do it. How is that rape? 

What is wrong with you?

2 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Yeah, in NY, facts don't seem to matter a whit when it comes to Trump. 

Despite your ignorant remarks, in most states, the jury in the initial trial determines the facts, and the appeals courts deal with the legal technicalities.

 

I don't know why you even comment on trials, they seem a big mystery to you.

3 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

What is wrong with you?

What is wrong with you? If a woman agrees to have sex with you, how is it rape? 

BTW, the trial is delayed a day, due to a sick juror.

 

Trump did show up at the trial.

4 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

For you Trump cult followers, does it really make any difference if Trump did it or not? Don't you think that any woman should be happy that Trump chose her?

If Trump forcibly raped that woman in a dressing room, I would like to see him executed. 

3 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Despite your ignorant remarks, in most states, the jury in the initial trial determines the facts, and the appeals courts deal with the legal technicalities.

 

I don't know why you even comment on trials, they seem a big mystery to you.

So, the "facts" are determined by the jury in New York, that explains a lot. 

6 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

I don't have enough time to consider every possible remote possibility connected with this case. I have to go with the facts. Or, Trump’s own words:

 

"I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. ... Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do anything."

 

  YES, YES YES, I know . 

You don't have to telling me again and again and again and again 

Its been well documented that he said that and everyone is aware 

You really don't need to keep posting it 

He said it nearly 20 years ago and some people keep posting it thinking that they are in the know and making a revelation .

   Did you think that I was going to reply "Oh really, when did he say that , first that Ive heard about it "

Just now, Nick Carter icp said:

 

  YES, YES YES, I know . 

You don't have to telling me again and again and again and again 

Its been well documented that he said that and everyone is aware 

You really don't need to keep posting it 

He said it nearly 20 years ago and some people keep posting it thinking that they are in the know and making a revelation .

   Did you think that I was going to reply "Oh really, when did he say that , first that Ive heard about it "

I wonder how many of these guys going on about Trump making the comment have been all over the gals in a go go. 

15 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

What is wrong with you? If a woman agrees to have sex with you, how is it rape? 

Deflection from this case.

14 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I wonder how many of these guys going on about Trump making the comment have been all over the gals in a go go. 

So, you think gogo dancers and random ladies in a department store are the same?

6 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

I am not sure about NY state law, but typically, appeals are about the law, not the facts.

This was a Federal trial in District Court, S.D. New York.