Trump appeals verdict finding him liable for sexual assault

[onthedarkside]

 

Former President Donald Trump is appealing a jury’s verdict finding him liable for sexually abusing and defaming writer E. Jean Carroll.

 

Trump’s lawyers filed a notice of appeal in the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday, two days after the nine-person jury ordered Trump to pay Carroll $5 million in damages.

 

Carroll accused Trump of sexually assaulting her in the dressing room of a department store in the 1990s. She sued Trump for battery and defamation.

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/05/11/trump-appeals-verdict-liable-for-sexual-assault-00096568

 

[Chomper Higgot]

Nobody likes a sore looser.

[SunnyinBangrak]

Is it not dangerous for a claim of SA without the claimant giving an exact date the event was alleged to have occurred on? More-so that it was decades ago. Seems to me that Trump was unable to give an alibi due to the lady not knowing what date the supposed attack took place on. Not exactly what I expect from the judicial system in a mature democracy but then it does seem the rule books were all thrown out when it comes to the persecution of Trump.

This case should send shivers up supporters of the current President who's accuser now doesn't need a specific date so the accused can not prove he was not there. I doubt they thought of this.

[jerrymahoney]

The 'notice of appeal' does not contain any reference to the basis of appeal. And once again, an appeal is usually based upon some procedural error in the already completed trial, not because the defendant disagrees with the verdict.

Edited May 11, 2023 by jerrymahoney

[bamnutsak]

I was most definitely wrong in my prediction that Trump would NOT appeal this verdict.

 

Still not seeing the end-game for him on this, especially given his statements during the CNN Town Hall. Why keep this matter alive for people to continue to be reviled by? And has he ever won an appeal? (Given the number of cases, all civil so far, I guess he must have won at least one?

 

 

Donald Trump filed a notice Tuesday which states his attention to appeal his loss this week in a New York City civil trial—which found him liable for sexual battery and defaming the writer E. Jean Carroll.

 

The notice, filed in the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, serves as a precursor for an incoming formal appeal.

 

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.590045/gov.uscourts.nysd.590045.179.0.pdf

 

[Tug]

41 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Is it not dangerous for a claim of SA without the claimant giving an exact date the event was alleged to have occurred on? More-so that it was decades ago. Seems to me that Trump was unable to give an alibi due to the lady not knowing what date the supposed attack took place on. Not exactly what I expect from the judicial system in a mature democracy but then it does seem the rule books were all thrown out when it comes to the persecution of Trump.

This case should send shivers up supporters of the current President who's accuser now doesn't need a specific date so the accused can not prove he was not there. I doubt they thought of this.

The old imbecile went out and defamed her again on the cnn dumpster fire last night and he continues to do the same on socal media lmao ???? she may file another defamation lawsuit cause the old clown can shut his yap lmao ???? 

[Chomper Higgot]

47 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Is it not dangerous for a claim of SA without the claimant giving an exact date the event was alleged to have occurred on? More-so that it was decades ago. Seems to me that Trump was unable to give an alibi due to the lady not knowing what date the supposed attack took place on. Not exactly what I expect from the judicial system in a mature democracy but then it does seem the rule books were all thrown out when it comes to the persecution of Trump.

This case should send shivers up supporters of the current President who's accuser now doesn't need a specific date so the accused can not prove he was not there. I doubt they thought of this.

Oh the drama!

 

Have never heard the term.

 

’On or around’?

 

As in, ‘on or around [insert date] the accused did [insert accusation].
 

Indictments, and convictions are frequently based on accusations that have no precise date or time.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, Tug said:

The old imbecile went out and defamed her again on the cnn dumpster fire last night and he continues to do the same on socal media lmao ???? she may file another defamation lawsuit cause the old clown can shut his yap lmao ???? 

With a precise date, time and video footage attached.

[herfiehandbag]

He really does think that he is above the law, civil and criminal, doesn't he.

 

I watched the bizarre CNN "reality show on steroids".

 

The man is running for President, yet seems to have no real policies. Just me, me and me.

[bendejo]

"Mr T____ why didn't you say this under oath when you had the chance to put this to rest once and for all?"

This question was not asked.

 

He got sued for $5 million for defaming her, next day he goes on television and does it again.  That's one way to ensure he'll continually be mentioned in the media. 

 

 

[stevenl]

3 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

He really does think that he is above the law, civil and criminal, doesn't he.

 

I watched the bizarre CNN "reality show on steroids".

 

The man is running for President, yet seems to have no real policies. Just me, me and me.

And people love it. One can only hope not enough in his club 

[jerrymahoney]

20 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Oh the drama!

 

Have never heard the term.

 

’On or around’?

 

As in, ‘on or around [insert date] the accused did [insert accusation].
 

Indictments, and convictions are frequently based on accusations that have no precise date or time.

 

 

Sure but not usually as in a matter of years. But items like this are most likely not going to be a matter in an appeal.

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Sure but not usually as in a matter of years. But items like this are most likely not going to be a matter in an appeal.

You called the trial wrong, don’t press it with your guess on the appeal.

[jerrymahoney]

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You called the trial wrong, don’t press it with your guess on the appeal.

Don't yet know what is the basis for an appeal. Neither do you.

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

25 minutes ago, bendejo said:

 

 

He got sued for $5 million for defaming her, next day he goes on television and does it again.  That's one way to ensure he'll continually be mentioned in the media. 

 

 

He must truly believe the old adage that there is no such thing as bad publicity. 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, jerrymahoney said:

Don't yet know what is the basis for an appeal. Neither do you.

I’ll make a stab at it.

 

Donny is a sore loser.

[Tug]

36 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

With a precise date, time and video footage attached.

In front of millions of witnesses you just can’t make this stuff up what a dumpster fire!

[jerrymahoney]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’ll make a stab at it.

 

This was my post yesterday on the other topic whether it may have any bearing on the appeal or not:

 

Yes. The jury's decision was that she was sexually assaulted but not raped.

 

Nowhere, either in her original complaint nor in court testimony, did Ms.  Carroll ever suggest that she was sexually assaulted but not raped.

 

In fact, from her cross exam with Tacopina: 

 

 After more back and forth, she declared, “I’m telling you, he raped me, whether I screamed or not.” per NYTimes

 

 

[In Full Agreement]

 

If the Big D wants to argue the verdict out in court again Ms. Carroll may provide him with the opportunity to do so.  It'd be the perfect outcome to Big D's lies and fabrications.

 

This 3:58 clip may foretell  Mr. D's unraveling as has no other event.

 

 

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, bamnutsak said:

I was most definitely wrong in my prediction that Trump would NOT appeal this verdict.

 

Still not seeing the end-game for him on this, especially given his statements during the CNN Town Hall. Why keep this matter alive for people to continue to be reviled by? And has he ever won an appeal? (Given the number of cases, all civil so far, I guess he must have won at least one?

 

 

Donald Trump filed a notice Tuesday which states his attention to appeal his loss this week in a New York City civil trial—which found him liable for sexual battery and defaming the writer E. Jean Carroll.

 

The notice, filed in the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, serves as a precursor for an incoming formal appeal.

 

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.590045/gov.uscourts.nysd.590045.179.0.pdf

 

"Still not seeing the end-game for him on this, especially given his statements during the CNN Town Hall."

 

I believe his strategy has always been to wear down those filing legitimate claims against him by dragging things out for years.  This ties up their time and finances indefinitely.  Few can afford that.

[placeholder]

On 5/12/2023 at 7:48 AM, jerrymahoney said:

This was my post yesterday on the other topic whether it may have any bearing on the appeal or not:

 

Yes. The jury's decision was that she was sexually assaulted but not raped.

 

Nowhere, either in her original complaint nor in court testimony, did Ms.  Carroll ever suggest that she was sexually assaulted but not raped.

 

In fact, from her cross exam with Tacopina: 

 

 After more back and forth, she declared, “I’m telling you, he raped me, whether I screamed or not.” per NYTimes

 

 

Since we don't know by what criteria the jury made its decision, your comments about what their decision meant are speculate. 

What we do know is is that Donald Trump denied that there was any sort of physical contact between him and Carroll. And the jury unequivocally rejected that. It took the 3 hours to come up with the verdict and that included a lunch break.

Edited May 13, 2023 by placeholder

[jerrymahoney]

33 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Since we don't know by what criteria the jury made its decision, your comments about what their decision meant are speculate. 

What we do know is is that Donald Trump denied that there was any sort of physical contact between him and Carroll. And the jury unequivocally rejected that. It took the 3 hours to come up with the verdict and that included a lunch break.

I just a bit ago saw Tacopina's full remarks on leaving the court.

He said that this was a rape case and never anything but a rape case and that the claim was for rape.

 

And that he found the verdict 'inconsistent'. And that would be -- among other issues -- what will be the basis of appeal.

 

And as I said before via ABA links, this will likely be based on one or more procedural issues.

 

Edited May 13, 2023 by jerrymahoney

[jerrymahoney]

He says pretty straight about what he feel is the basis for an appeal. And the appeal has nothing to do with how the jury came to their decision.

[Pink Mist]

A derogatory name calling post for the Attorney has been removed.

 

 

[placeholder]

 

4 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

I just a bit ago saw Tacopina's full remarks on leaving the court.

He said that this was a rape case and never anything but a rape case and that the claim was for rape.

 

And that he found the verdict 'inconsistent'. And that would be -- among other issues -- what will be the basis of appeal.

 

And as I said before via ABA links, this will likely be based on one or more procedural issues.

 

Well, procedural issues would not be about the jury's verdict.

[jerrymahoney]

 

[bendejo]

He doesn't know her, witchhunt/hoax etc.

Then he says "what kind of women goes into a store's dressing room with a man . . . ?"

Wait, he said it didn't happen.  So no he's saying he did go into the dressing room with her?

 

 

Edited May 13, 2023 by bendejo

[jerrymahoney]

6 minutes ago, bendejo said:

He doesn't know her, witchhunt/hoax etc.

Then he says "what kind of women goes into a store's dressing room with a man . . . ?"

Wait, he said it didn't happen.  So no he's saying he did go into the dressing room with her?

 

 

None of those questions will have anything to do with an appeal.

[jerrymahoney]

 

Jury Instructions -- Role in Appeals

Jury instructions play a significant role in the appellate process; errors or omissions in the instructions can provide grounds for an appeal. Appellate courts may review instructions given to the jury to determine if they were made in a legally permissible manner. If the appellate court finds an error in the instructions process, it may, if sufficiently problematic, reverse a decision or order a new trial.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_instructions

Edited May 14, 2023 by Pink Mist
Quoted post removed

[still kicking]

3 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

What comment?

The comment you made on someone else's post.