Skip to comments.Judge denies Trump's mistrial motion claiming unfair rulings in trial over E. Jean Carroll's rape allegation
Posted on 05/01/2023 10:55:58 AM PDT by Coronal
A federal judge in New York on Monday denied former President Donald Trump's bid for a mistrial in writer E. Jean Carroll’s lawsuit alleging that Trump raped her in a Manhattan department store in the 1990s.
In an 18-page filing hours ahead of his second day of cross-examining Carroll, Trump lawyer Joe Tacopina accused U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan, who is overseeing the case, of making “pervasive unfair and prejudicial rulings” against his client.
Barring a mistrial ruling, Tacopina requested that Kaplan “correct the record for each and every instance in which the Court has mischaracterized the facts of this case to the jury” and allow Trump’s counsel to “have greater latitude” to cross-examine Carroll.
Tacopina wrote that Kaplan’s “one-sided rulings” demonstrate “a deeper leaning towards one party over another,” including comments that express “favoritism.”
“Here, despite the fact trial testimony has been underway for only two days, the proceedings are already replete with numerous examples of Defendant’s unfair treatment by the Court, most of which have been witnessed by the Jury,” the letter said.
Kaplan denied the motion Monday morning shortly before the jury was brought in to hear Carroll's testimony, a court official confirmed.
Lawyers for Carroll did not immediately respond to NBC News’ request for comment.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
Gotta LOVE our TWO TIER “System of Justice”, right?
A federal judge in New York on Monday denied former President Donald Trump’s bid for a mistrial in writer E. Jean Carroll’s lawsuit alleging that Trump raped her in a Manhattan department store in the 1990s.
Gee, what a surprise. Who would have seen that coming?
(Is a sarc tag really necessary?)
“Judge, I believe you’re being unfair... please rule on that.”
“I rule that I’m being fair.”
(At least the road to an appeal has now been paved.)
NY Rat hack Judge. A trial is pointless
An unlikely request if you thought you were winning.
The judge who denied the motion is the same one that made the initial decisions, right? Sounds like Trump's attorney is laying the groundwork for an appeal. Likely the first of many, in case they might be needed.
The Ju$t U$ system is a joke.
Friggin’ Feral “Judges”. The Number One threat to the American Republic. Bass turds.
That’s the way these things work. The whole purpose of the request is to preserve the issues for appeal. In a case like this it’s likely that the judge knows damned well that a guilty verdict will be appealed and that the appeal will likely prevail BUT Trump will then have to spend more money on the appeal and THAT is where he gets his vengeance against Trump. It’s called “Lawfare” and it’s what American “justice” is all about these days.
What a surprise! So tired of crooked political judges.
The whole thing doesn’t make sense. Why would he be raping women in department store dressing rooms? I never heard of that happening anyway. She can’t remember the date or the year.
It was like when someone accused Kavenaugh of drugging and organizing gang rapes of girls at prep school parties when he was in high school. Aside from it being way far back, it didn’t even make sense, and was completely improbable.
The legal system supports its own corruption.
Yep, gone are the days when judges at least tried to be fair.
This thread had to be like catnip for you...
Verdict first trial later. Off with his head.
Note to Tacopino: Life is not fair!
Crooked scumbag judge. The fix is in!
If you believe you ARE winning, but you also suspect that the judge believes so too and is doing everything he can to tilt the case the other way, then a request like this is setting up a basis for appeal later.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.