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

[jerrymahoney]

4 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

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

Yes. He could say:

 

"Whenever she says I was there, I wasn't there. And I don't know where I was when I wasn't there at the time she says I was there."

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Yes. He could say:

 

"Whenever she says I was there, I wasn't there. And I don't know where I was when I wasn't there at the time she says I was there."

He has to say those words to a jury for it to be admitted as evidence. Not to fox news.

[n00dle]

8 hours ago, Credo said:

So, will he have to register as a sex offender?  A whole lot of glorious things go along with being on the list!

 

civil not criminal case, so no.

[transam]

Think forget the 2024 Prezzy thingy, he is an embarrassment.

Perhaps manage his Scottish golf course, and relax in his old age....

[jerrymahoney]

14 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

He has to say those words to a jury for it to be admitted as evidence. Not to fox news.

Yes and he could have sent (the late) Groucho Marx instead and it would still be the same.

[Pink Mist]

A post using vulgarities to describe Trump has been removed as well as a trolling misinformation post which included off topic portions.

 

8. You will not post vulgarities, obscenities or profanities.

 

[LosLobo]

28 minutes ago, riclag said:

 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.

Saying that Trump is appealing is like stating that the Pope is a Catholic.

 

Yes its not finished yet but I am mainly referring to E. Jean Carroll vs Trump 2.0 which alleges defamation when Trump was President.

 

And there is the other 26 odd cases of legal jeopardy pending.

 

Trump Investigations: A Rundown Of All The Lawsuits And Cases Involving The Former President (forbes.com)

 

As an aside, surprisingly when asked about George Santos and his recent indictment for sexual and election misconduct, McCarthy said that if he is found guilty he will ask him to resign. That is my policy and principle on this.

 

I wonder the same bar will be set by him for Trump.

 

Rep. George Santos charged by Justice Department in federal probe | CNN Politics

 

[ozimoron]

26 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Yes and he could have sent (the late) Groucho Marx instead and it would still be the same.

The verdict probably yes but in legal terms, no. Had Trump given any testimony the jury would have been required to consider that testimony on it's merits, just like hers. I guess you buy into the "NY hates me" mantra?

[placeholder]

8 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Saying that Trump is appealing is like stating that the Pope is a Catholic..

I don't think that Trump is the least bit appealing, even if that means the pope isn't Catholic

8 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

 

 

 

 

[Walker88]

The guy is an expert marksmen when it comes to shooting himself in the foot.

 

In his deposition, he said, "Rich men have been getting away with this for a million years, unfortunately or fortunately"

 

One might guess that his use of "fortunately" to describe sexual assault did not sit well in the jury deliberation room.

[JustAnotherHun]

Hard times to come for (wealthy, prominent or hated) men.
They have to be aware to be convicted for allegations with thin evidence for things they're accused to have done 30 years before.

But at least a good opportunitiy for women to avoid old-age poverty. Just say "Mr. X raped me somewhere somewhen in the last century", find one or two friends to testify "yes, she told me about it", done.

[Lacessit]

47 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

She said he raped her and he said he didn't and she is not his type.

And now he has to pay for speaking out that he didn't rape her.

What should he have done? Say nothing and let the world think her rape accusations are correct?

 

The 80 year old woman claimed she was raped when she was about 50. If she would have reported the alleged rape at that time, then the police would have asked her for a date and time when it supposedly happened. And then the accused rapist could have checked where he was at that time.

 

Now, 30 years later, what can Trump do? Does he have any chance to prove that on day x he wasn't in that shop? There was no day x, she doesn't remember the day. So now maybe Trump could argue that he was never in that shop for a few months. But what if he was in the shop for shopping, but he didn't meet that woman and he didn't rape her.

How can he defend himself against: He raped me sometime within those 3 months 30 years ago. I don't remember the date. And there is no evidence. And there is no witness. But believe me, he did it.

That's just stupid! 

Trump is the one who is stupid. If he had simply said " No, I did not rape her" and left it at that, IMO he would have been OK. It was the defamation that sunk him.

Plus doubling down in his deposition, and Truth Social posts.

At the end of the day, it was a question of who the jury believed, E Jean Carroll, or Trump.

I am reminded of the aphorism "It is better to stay silent, and be taken for a fool, than to open one's mouth, and remove all doubt".

[jerrymahoney]

26 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

The verdict probably yes but in legal terms, no. Had Trump given any testimony the jury would have been required to consider that testimony on it's merits, just like hers. I guess you buy into the "NY hates me" mantra?

You may be right. The Trump team decided against it.

 

He denied the whole thing in video tape deposition part of which, at least, was shown in Court.

[Chomper Higgot]

Just now, JustAnotherHun said:

Hard times to come for (wealthy, prominent or hated) men.
They have to be aware to be convicted for allegations with thin evidence for things they're accused to have done 30 years before.

But at least a good opportunitiy for women to avoid old-age poverty. Just say "Mr. X raped me somewhere somewhen in the last century", find one or two friends to testify "yes, she told me about it", done.

Of course, men are the victims here.

 

More fuel for that self proclaimed grievance thing that’s all the rage among some men these days.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

You may be right. The Trump team decided against it.

 

He denied the whole thing in video tape deposition part of which, at least, was shown in Court.

I hear it did go down to well.

[Berkshire]

6 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

You may be right. The Trump team decided against it.

 

He denied the whole thing in video tape deposition part of which, at least, was shown in Court.

That's funny.  Criminals deny crimes all the time.  Alex Murdaugh denied that he killed his wife and son, but was still found guilty and sentenced to life.  The fact that Trump refused to testify in court under oath speaks volumes.

[Lacessit]

6 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

You may be right. The Trump team decided against it.

 

He denied the whole thing in video tape deposition part of which, at least, was shown in Court.

He also said during the video deposition "stars" have been getting away with sexual assault " fortunately or unfortunately".

It was probably true; however, the three women on the jury probably took that as an admission of sexual predation.

[jerrymahoney]

The Federal District court verdict is in. Tacopina says they will appeal.

 

On what basis might they appeal?

 

Donald Trump’s attorney Joe Tacopina called the jury’s decision in the civil trial Tuesday a “strange verdict,” noting that the jury rejected the rape claim against his client.  

 

While the jury found that Trump sexually abused E. Jean Carroll in 1996, sufficient to hold him liable for battery, the jury did not find that Carroll proved he raped her.

 

Tacopina, speaking outside the Manhattan courthouse, said that they would “obviously” be appealing the verdict.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/politics/live-news/e-jean-carroll-trump-trial-verdict-05-09-23/index.html

 

So my guess what they might go after on appeal:

 

Jury Instructions.

Edited May 10, 2023 by jerrymahoney

[Pink Mist]

A troll post and response have been removed. This OP has nothing to do with Trump being a republican or democrat.

[Lacessit]

3 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

The Federal District court verdict is. Tacopina says they will appeal.

 

On what basis might they appeal?

 

Donald Trump’s attorney Joe Tacopina called the jury’s decision in the civil trial Tuesday a “strange verdict,” noting that the jury rejected the rape claim against his client.  

 

While the jury found that Trump sexually abused E. Jean Carroll in 1996, sufficient to hold him liable for battery, the jury did not find that Carroll proved he raped her.

 

Tacopina, speaking outside the Manhattan courthouse, said that they would “obviously” be appealing the verdict.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/politics/live-news/e-jean-carroll-trump-trial-verdict-05-09-23/index.html

 

So my guess what they might go after on appeal:

 

Jury Instructions.

What was there in the jury instructions which might be grounds for appeal?

I would hate trying to represent Trump, he can't keep his mouth shut when he would be well advised to do so.

[jerrymahoney]

13 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

What was there in the jury instructions which might be grounds for appeal?

Tacopina already said.

 

From the original Carroll v Trump complaint:

 

1. Roughly 27 years ago, playful banter at the luxury department store Bergdorf
Goodman on Fifth Avenue in New York City took a dark turn when Defendant Donald J. Trump
seized Plaintiff E. Jean Carroll, forced her up against a dressing room wall, pinned her in place
with his shoulder, and raped her. 

Edited May 10, 2023 by jerrymahoney

[simple1]

9 hours ago, Credo said:

So, will he have to register as a sex offender?  A whole lot of glorious things go along with being on the list!

 

No, it's a civil case. Currently claiming he will appeal verdict.

[Phoenix Rising]

Trump Lies That He Wasn’t Able to Defend Himself in Rape Trial

 

"“Waiting for a jury decision on a False Accusation where I, despite being a current political candidate and leading all others in both parties, am not allowed to speak or defend myself, even as hard nosed reporters scream questions about this case at me,” the former president wrote on Truth Social on Tuesday.

This is a lie, Trump has had every opportunity to defend himself in the trial. His legal team informed Judge Lewis Kaplan last week, however, that they would not be presenting any defense."

 

Stop the presses, trump's lying!!!

[onthedarkside]

A baiting troll post has been removed along with an off topic post

[sqwakvfr]

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Nevertheless, sworn testimony is evidence.

 

The claim there was no evidence presented is nonsense.

In my past life sometimes we called testify as testi-lie.   Some will know what this means,

[billd766]

6 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

 

I wondered how long it would take for a Trump supporter to come long and decry the verdict.

 

Please tell us if you were in the court, or on the jury and heard ALL of the evidence?

[alanrchase]

19 minutes ago, Phoenix Rising said:

Trump Lies That He Wasn’t Able to Defend Himself in Rape Trial

 

"“Waiting for a jury decision on a False Accusation where I, despite being a current political candidate and leading all others in both parties, am not allowed to speak or defend myself, even as hard nosed reporters scream questions about this case at me,” the former president wrote on Truth Social on Tuesday.

This is a lie, Trump has had every opportunity to defend himself in the trial. His legal team informed Judge Lewis Kaplan last week, however, that they would not be presenting any defense."

 

Stop the presses, trump's lying!!!

Trump is not saying he wasn't allowed to defend himself in court, he is moaning about the judge restricting what he was allowed to say outside of court during the trial. Trump, of course, is oblivious to the fact that the only legitimate place to present his defence is in the courtroom. 

[vandeventer]

1 minute ago, billd766 said:

I wondered how long it would take for a Trump supporter to come long and decry the verdict.

 

Please tell us if you were in the court, or on the jury and heard ALL of the evidence?

What Evidence??? No proof just hearsay.

[vandeventer]

6 hours ago, ThailandRyan said:

You are aware that civil trials are not criminal trials and so the main case was his defamation of Carroll.  So many other cases to be heard still.  His appeal will go nowhere as his deposition which the jury was made aware of basically sealed the verdict. No defense was needed for what they convicted him of.

Try jury misconduct on his appeal.

[jerrymahoney]

6 minutes ago, billd766 said:

I wondered how long it would take for a Trump supporter to come long and decry the verdict.

 

Please tell us if you were in the court, or on the jury and heard ALL of the evidence?

I wasn't in Court. I support all other criminal investigations into Trump. I just think this case may be reversed on appeal. And I think Tacopina has given hint as to how.