Trump appeals verdict finding him liable for sexual assault

[jerrymahoney]

11 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Actually, your claim has been that the jurors' verdict didn't make sense which would give grounds for a reversal. I gave 2 reasons why  their verdict did make sense. Presumably, judges are acquainted with such reasoning.

And using  the characterization of Trump's lawyers'  to sum up the issue is,, somewhat suspect.

The only balancedl item that you offered in your comment was that an appellate judge panel will decide whether they will accept the case. So what?

So what you mention has little to do with what an appeal would be about.

 

I don't offer anything. All I am trying to do is infer -- based upon Tacopina's public comments -- what an appeal would entail at least in part.

And the reason I went back to this topic is that Ms. Carroll and her attorney TODAY are now contemplating either new or amended defamation charges AND the Trump team is considering litigation against Carroll on their own behalf.

 

Edited May 23, 2023 by jerrymahoney

[placeholder]

8 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

So what you mention has little to do with what an appeal would be about.

 

And the reason I went back to this topic is that Ms. Carroll and her attorney are now contemplating either new or amended defamation charges AND the Trump team is considering litigation against Carroll on their own behalf.

 

Really? You've been claiming that it could be about the jury's  decision which you have repeatedly claimed is irrational and  somehow that irrational verdict could be due to the judge's incorrect instructions.  And you have been extraordinarily trusting in what Trump's lawyer claims.

[jerrymahoney]

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

Really? You've been claiming that it could be about the jury's  decision which you have repeatedly claimed is irrational and  somehow that irrational verdict could be due to the judge's incorrect instructions.  And you have been extraordinarily trusting in what Trump's lawyer claims.

Fine. Carroll's lawyer says Trump et al have zero grounds for an appeal. So I guess you might trust in that.

[placeholder]

17 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Fine. Carroll's lawyer says Trump et al have zero grounds for an appeal. So I guess you might trust in that.

I'm not the one citing interested parties. You are.

[jerrymahoney]

29 minutes ago, placeholder said:

I'm not the one citing interested parties. You are.

Of course he's an interested party. He is outlining the possible basis for appeal.

[jerrymahoney]

Trump fights to keep the word 'rape' in E. Jean Carroll's remaining defamation case
May 27, 2023

 

Carroll wants to amend her remaining lawsuit by removing the word 'rape' and adding new alleged defamations.

His lawyers plan to argue that since a jury has now rejected her rape claim, Trump rightfully called her a liar.

 

Carroll's proposed amended complaint "substitutes every reference of the word 'rape' and replaces it with 'sexual assault,'" Trump attorney Alina Habba writes in the filing, addressed to US District Court Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, the presiding judge for Carroll's two defamation suits.

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-fights-keep-word-rape-in-e-jean-carroll-case-2023-5

[jerrymahoney]

Per the above:

 

Nov 24, 2022 version original complaint Carroll II

 

Paragraph 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. 

 

May 22, 2023 version. proposed amendment to complaint Carroll 1 1999

Paragraph 2. Roughly 27 years ago, what began as playful banter at the luxury department store Bergdorf Goodman on Fifth Avenue in New York City took a dark turn when Trump seized Carroll, forced her up against a dressing room wall, pinned her in place with his shoulder, and sexually assaulted her.

 

 

Edited May 31, 2023 by jerrymahoney

[placeholder]

20 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

Trump fights to keep the word 'rape' in E. Jean Carroll's remaining defamation case
May 27, 2023

 

Carroll wants to amend her remaining lawsuit by removing the word 'rape' and adding new alleged defamations.

His lawyers plan to argue that since a jury has now rejected her rape claim, Trump rightfully called her a liar.

 

Carroll's proposed amended complaint "substitutes every reference of the word 'rape' and replaces it with 'sexual assault,'" Trump attorney Alina Habba writes in the filing, addressed to US District Court Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, the presiding judge for Carroll's two defamation suits.

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-fights-keep-word-rape-in-e-jean-carroll-case-2023-5

That claim would be laughed out of court. This was a civil trial. Just because not enough evidence was produced to qualify as a preponderance of evidence doesn't mean that the jury found that Carroll was lying. This kind of claim may sway public opinion, not judicial opinion.

[jerrymahoney]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

That claim would be laughed out of court. This was a civil trial. Just because not enough evidence was produced to qualify as a preponderance of evidence doesn't mean that the jury found that Carroll was lying. This kind of claim may sway public opinion, not judicial opinion.

You seem not to realize that there were 2 separate civil cases filed by Ms. Carroll. The one generally referred to as Carroll 1 complaint was filed in 2019 when Trump was still President.

 

Carroll II is the 2022 complaint that was filed after NY State provided a special reprieve on statute of limitations and to which the jury gave the verdict.

 

The current proposed amended claim only involves the 2019 Carroll I. The 2022 claim jury in the trial you reference has nothing to do with it. That trial is now in appeal mode.

 

What is currently at issue, in part, is whether Judge Kaplan will allow the Carroll team to amend their 2019 defamation-only complaint to say "sexually abused" instead of "rape".

Edited June 1, 2023 by jerrymahoney

[jerrymahoney]

Trump seeks to stop second E. Jean Carroll lawsuit

 

Lawyers for Donald Trump are attempting to block a long-stalled defamation suit by writer E. Jean Carroll by using her successful $5 million verdict in a different case she won against the former president.

 

The “operative question in this case is, and has always been, whether a rape occurred in the Bergdorf Goodman dressing room," the filing said, and the jury "found that one did not.”

 

"Faced with the Carroll II jury's rejection of her rape accusation, Ms. Carroll now sees to remove nearly every reference * of the word 'rape' in her complaint and abandon the narrative she has conveyed to the public for years," Habba said. (* approximately 71 changes 'rape' to 'sexual abuse')

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-seeks-stop-second-e-jean-carroll-lawsuit-rcna87921

*******************

NB The following is verbatim from the actual MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO AMEND (their caps)

 

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.543790/gov.uscourts.nysd.543790.164.0.pdf

 

I. PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED ALLEGATIONS UNDULY PREJUDICE DEFENDANT
It is well established that “prejudice to the opposing party resulting from a proposed amendment [is] among the most important reasons to deny leave to amend.”

 

With respect to the instant application, Plaintiff’s proposed amendment is unduly prejudicial because it seeks to fundamentally alter the nature of this action, at the eleventh hour, in response to a jury verdict that directly undercuts the viability of her claim. As such, the proposed amendment is inherently prejudicial to Defendant.

 

II. PLAINTIFF’S MOTION SHOULD BE DENIED BECAUSE OF PLAINTIFF’S UNDUE DELAY

Courts in the Second Circuit have consistently held that where a party seeks to amend after an inordinate delay, “[t]he burden is on the party who wishes to amend to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay.”

 

III. PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO AMEND SHOULD BE DENIED DUE TO FUTILITY.
Plaintiff’s Motion should be rejected for another standalone reason: the remarks made by the Defendant during the Town Hall meeting are safeguarded by the fair reporting privilege, which consequently prevents them from being used as a foundation to enhance the punitive damages sought by Plaintiff in this case, and the amendment is therefore futile.

 

 

Of the amendments proposed by Plaintiff, the most significant change to her Complaint is the sudden, ex post facto revision of what she claims occurred in the Bergdorf Goodman dressing 7
room. Indeed, in her Amended Complaint, Plaintiff seeks to abandon her accusation that Defendant raped her—which she has claimed since 2019 and continues to maintain publicly to this day—in an attempt to re-characterize the alleged incident as a “sexual assault.” 

 

Her reason for doing so is clear—she is attempting to comport her Complaint with the jury's verdict from Carroll II to capitalize on the favorable aspect of the ruling while minimizing the impact of the adverse portion. (my italics) Consequently, the Plaintiff has substituted approximately 71 mentions of the previous assault as a rape with various iterations of "sexual assault" and "sexual abuse." 

 

The Amended Complaint also sets forth a number of other substantive changes, including, but not limited to, the following:

 

Instead of stating that it was strange for the lingerie department of Bergdorf Goodman to be empty, the Complaint now states that it was not uncommon for this to occur; Id at ¶ 34.

[jerrymahoney]

Court filing 26 MAY 2023from 

 

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Civil Appeal Pre-Argument Statement (Form C)

Addendum A (1) Nature of the Action

 

Appellee-Plaintiff, E. Jean Carroll’s (“Plaintiff”) contentions arise out of an alleged sexual assault which she claims occurred at the Bergdorf Goodman store in New York, New
 York on an uncertain date “between the fall of 1995 and the spring of 1996.” There were no eyewitnesses to this alleged incident nor is there any photographic or video evidence of this purported incident at Bergdorf Goodman, which is not surprising since this alleged incident never occurred.

 

By way of one example, Plaintiff claims that there were no customers or staff anywhere to be seen immediately before, during and after the alleged incident. 

 

*************

 

This document is on the court docket of the prior jury trial. The letter is dated May 9. The jury verdict was reached May 9.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 18, 2023 by jerrymahoney

[Jingthing]

He appeals everything.

He's an expert in how rich people experience a different justice system.

All his life he's avoided major consequences for his life of crimes.

A regular citizen would have been locked up long ago.

His tactic now is to win the presidency, never give up the presidency, and then he's dodged prison for his entire life.

It may work. 

[jerrymahoney]

I think the appeal in some measure will say jury instructions should have been:

 

If you find the defendant liable for rape, then go to the damages section.

 

If you find the defendant not liable for rape, then you can go home and thank for your service.

[xylophone]

11 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

He appeals everything.

He's an expert in how rich people experience a different justice system.

All his life he's avoided major consequences for his life of crimes.

A regular citizen would have been locked up long ago.

His tactic now is to win the presidency, never give up the presidency, and then he's dodged prison for his entire life.

It may work. 

Although I'm not a trump supporter, far from it in fact, I would have to say that the allegation by this woman seems a bit flimsy to me – – no witnesses, unsure of the date on which it happened and well over 25 years since it supposedly took place.

 

Will be interesting to see how this pans out, but I think the slippery orange one may well duck this.
 

[stevenl]

23 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

He appeals everything.

He's an expert in how rich people experience a different justice system.

All his life he's avoided major consequences for his life of crimes.

A regular citizen would have been locked up long ago.

His tactic now is to win the presidency, never give up the presidency, and then he's dodged prison for his entire life.

It may work. 

Sad but true.

[placeholder]

10 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

I think the appeal in some measure will say jury instructions should have been:

 

If you find the defendant liable for rape, then go to the damages section.

 

If you find the defendant not liable for rape, then you can go home and thank for your service.

First off, the consensus of experts is that the appeal has little chance of succeeding. But if this is the tack they take, even less of one.

[chalawaan]

The base are giving till it hurts, the Maestro feels no pain. 

 

You gotta be on drugs to donate serious cash towards his multiple judgements, legal fees, AND a multiple million dollar run he's likely to lose, there's just too much dirt on him for most swing Americans to stomach. And that's who will carry this one. 

 

If this really was a witch hunt, he'd be swapping shanks with Weinstein by now. 

And that's a fact. 

 

 

[ozimoron]

11 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

I think the appeal in some measure will say jury instructions should have been:

 

If you find the defendant liable for rape, then go to the damages section.

 

If you find the defendant not liable for rape, then you can go home and thank for your service.

The original claim was rape because Carrol obviously believed it was. If the jury found he committed sexual assault then but can't prove penetration then you think there should be no damages? The motion will join the plethora of frivolous court filings Trump has made.

[chalawaan]

11 hours ago, xylophone said:

Although I'm not a trump supporter, far from it in fact, I would have to say that the allegation by this woman seems a bit flimsy to me – – no witnesses, unsure of the date on which it happened and well over 25 years since it supposedly took place.

 

Will be interesting to see how this pans out, but I think the slippery orange one may well duck this.
 

That's already done. Found proven!

Five million in damages awarded. 

 

What's happening now is further damages because, like the stolen election BS, he just keeps going until his mouth gets him, and Fox, and Rudi, and those lawyer ladies, deeper and deeper into a litigation hole. 

It's hilarious, the only "witch" is his own ego. 

Edited June 18, 2023 by chalawaan

[bendejo]

5 hours ago, ozimoron said:

The original claim was rape because Carrol obviously believed it was. If the jury found he committed sexual assault then but can't prove penetration then you think there should be no damages? The motion will join the plethora of frivolous court filings Trump has made.

Addressing the meaning of rape vs sexual assault.  My apologies in advance for the graphic content, but I am quoting The Atlantic, not a porn site.  Looking at the incident Lara Logan went through in Tahir Square

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/07/lara-logan-60-minutes-correspondent-conspiracy-theories/674168/

 

Quote

This was when Logan thought she was going to die. Later she would recall for Newsweek how the men raped her with their hands, with sticks, with flagpoles. Onlookers took photos with their cellphones. The assault lasted at least 25 minutes before a group of Egyptian women intervened. They were able to cover Logan until soldiers managed to reach her and get her to her hotel, where she was seen by a doctor.

raped her with their hands

 

 

 

[jerrymahoney]

6 hours ago, placeholder said:

First off, the consensus of experts is that the appeal has little chance of succeeding. But if this is the tack they take, even less of one.

The tack they will take is listed in the appeal documents.

 

[jerrymahoney]

6 hours ago, chalawaan said:

That's already done. Found proven!

Five million in damages awarded. 

On appeal. Also a separate motion that damages were excessive. The verdict was "sexual assault" but the damages are more commensurate with "rape".

[jerrymahoney]

6 hours ago, ozimoron said:

The original claim was rape because Carrol obviously believed it was. 

Jury instructions are generally to consider the charges as specified in the complaint. This is from the original 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. 

 

And even after the verdict, Carroll in interviews still insists regardless of the jury decision that she was raped:

 

Ms. Carroll, in the interview, blamed herself for their decision to find Mr. Trump liable for sexually abusing her but not for rape.

“I didn’t make myself clear when I was testifying,” Ms. Carroll said.

 

In the interview Thursday, Ms. Carroll noted that she had twice been married, and she said, “I know what a penis feels like, and he did insert his penis.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/11/nyregion/e-jean-carroll-trump-defamation.html

Edited June 18, 2023 by jerrymahoney

[ozimoron]

10 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Jury instructions are generally to consider the charges as specified in the complaint. This is from the original 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. 

 

And even after the verdict, Carroll in interviews still insists regardless of the jury decision that she was raped,

That's her prerogative. Not being able to prove rape does not mean that it didn't happen.

[jerrymahoney]

3 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

That's her prerogative. Not being able to prove rape does not mean that it didn't happen.

Rape. That was the complaint as filed.

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, jerrymahoney said:

Rape. That was the complaint as filed.

Not what I said or implied.

[jerrymahoney]

5 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Not what I said or implied.

But that is part of the appeal. Nowhere in the complaint does it suggest specifically or otherwise that Carroll was sexually abused but not raped.

Edited June 18, 2023 by jerrymahoney

[placeholder]

22 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Jury instructions are generally to consider the charges as specified in the complaint. This is from the original 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. 

 

And even after the verdict, Carroll in interviews still insists regardless of the jury decision that she was raped:

 

Ms. Carroll, in the interview, blamed herself for their decision to find Mr. Trump liable for sexually abusing her but not for rape.

“I didn’t make myself clear when I was testifying,” Ms. Carroll said.

 

In the interview Thursday, Ms. Carroll noted that she had twice been married, and she said, “I know what a penis feels like, and he did insert his penis.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/11/nyregion/e-jean-carroll-trump-defamation.html

There were 2 charges. 

Sexual battery

Rape

 

[jerrymahoney]

4 minutes ago, placeholder said:

There were 2 charges. 

Sexual battery

Rape

122. Trump committed battery against Carroll when he forcibly raped and groped her. 

 

Not raped OR groped her.

 

Trump has filed appeal documents. Carroll has yet to respond.

Edited June 18, 2023 by jerrymahoney

[Chomper Higgot]

13 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

122. Trump committed battery against Carroll when he forcibly raped and groped her. 

 

Not raped OR groped her.

 

Trump has filed appeal documents. Carroll has yet to respond.

Does groping meet the definition of sexual battery?

 

If so then groping is sexual battery regardless of rape.

 

But surely Trump has more pressing legal to deal with, perhaps not, perhaps he really can’t stomach a woman standing up to him.