A Bombshell Discovery Could Save Trump $83.3 Million in the E. Jean Carroll Case

PJ Media ^ | 01/30/2024 | Matt Margolis

[SeekAndFind]

Last week, a jury awarded E. Jean Carroll a ridiculous $83.3 million in damages for alleged defamation by Donald Trump after she made dubious allegations that he sexually assaulted her in the 1990s.

Trump’s antics in the courtroom have been widely reported, but so have the judge’s rather bizarre orders that essentially hamstrung Trump and his defense, forbidding him to present exculpatory evidence or defend himself.

There may be a reason why Trump wasn’t given the opportunity to adequately defend himself. It appears that Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, who presided over the case, may have a major conflict of interest.

The New York Post has learned that Kaplan was once a “mentor” to Carroll’s lawyer, Roberta Kaplan. The two aren’t related, but they worked together in the early 1990s at the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkin, Wharton & Garrison in Midtown.

In a letter filed on Monday, Trump’s lawyer, Alina Habba, demanded answers:

If Your Honor truly worked with Ms. Kaplan in any capacity—especially if there was a mentor/mentee relationship—that fact should have been disclosed before any case involving these parties was permitted to proceed forward. This issue is particularly concerning since Plaintiff’s other lead counsel, Shawn Crowley, served as Your Honor’s law clerk, and we were previously advised that Your Honor co-officiated her wedding.  28 U.S.C. Section 455(a) states that “[a]ny… judge … of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” 

Habba also noted that Canon 3 of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges makes it clear that a judge must "disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including" when the judge served as "a lawyer with whom the judge previously practiced law served."

[SeekAndFind]

Let's recap: It appears the judge in this case, Lewis A. Kaplan, worked with Carroll’s lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, and officiated at her wedding. Carroll’s other lawyer was also a law clerk for Judge Lewis A. Kaplan. That Lewis Kaplan didn’t reveal these conflicts of interest is enough for him to face major consequences, but clearly, he should have recused himself from the case.

The judge ought to publicly confirm or deny the association.

[BipolarBob]

OR the video of Jean Carroll in which she said she would do anything to help Biden beat Trump. Also she has a history of these baseless claims.

[FlingWingFlyer]

They should make the “jury” pay her that 83 million dollars.

[Tennessee Nana]

3 strikes

Yer out !!!!

The mentorship and the law clerk and the wedding

[Bayard]

Not sure these amount to more than apparent conflict of interest. It could add up to a case though, I don’t know if this is more than click bait.

[ComputerGuy]

If it’s not an Exclusive Breaking Bombshell I can’t be bothered.

[Pontiac]

This judge should be impeached, removed from office and disbarred.

But as he is a judge in New York State it will never happen.

[odawg]

I think the major bombshell in this case is that not one iota of evidence was presented at the trial. It was just her accusation.

Normally, in a trial, there has to be evidence displayed and the evidence is contested to be verified or proven false.

What do people automatically say when they are convicted in a trial and they think they are innocent. They will say they are not guilty. Trump said that and the statement theoretically will cost him $83 million.

Of course, this whole thing will be dismissed sooner or later. With most people it would be sooner, but since it is Trump, it will probably be later.

[desertsolitaire]

I think the question is has this type of situation ever been used to successfully reverse a previous case’s outcome? Does any case impact like that depend solely on the judge themselves admitting they were wrong and dismissing it or not, at their sole and complete discretion? Or would other ? Appeal courts have to WANT to get involved?

[1Old Pro]

not one iota of evidence was presented at the trial. It was just her accusation.

Ain't lawfare grand.

[No name given]

I hope E. Jean Carroll doesn’t collect a cent!

[Wdempsey]

Jail for ‘E’ and her associates. Dusbarment for judge and proscutorial staff..

Court costs and reimbursement to DJT for time wasted and attempted damage to his good name.

Only a damned Democrat would be caught with this ugly crazy thing.

[rlmorel]

Here are a sample of images of Tweets by this person Carroll, that were suppressed during the trial and could not be shown to the jury:

Note:These are not tweets from her to Trump. I believe these were tweets to other people that ended up with the Trump defense team.

[thegagline]

What do these people have in common?

Judge Kaplan
Judge Engoron
Merrick Garland
Judge Beryl Howell
Shenna Bellows (Maine Secretary of State)
Jena Griswold (Colorado Secretary of State)
George Soros
Reid Hoffman (financial support for E Jean Carroll)

[Alberta's Child]

I think the question is has this type of situation ever been used to successfully reverse a previous case’s outcome?

It happens all the time in civil lawsuits.

Even if the original verdict in favor of the plaintiff is allowed to stand, the damages are often reduced on appeal -- sometimes all the way down to $1.

[tired&retired]

Love to see Trump counter sue for court and atty costs. Sue the plaintiff, her atty, and the judge.

[Enlightened1]

[thegagline]

It is difficult to get a Judge to recuse himself. The legal community is somewhat incestuous. For example, judges aren't conflicted out due to lawyers appearing before them who contributed to their election campaigns. I literally worked on a Judge's campaign responding to political, union, and business groups surveys which led to endorsements and donations and the Judge didn't recuse themselves when I appeared before her.

The law firm in question, Paul, Weiss, Rifkin, Wharton & Garrison currently has over a thousand attorneys. In that Plaintiff's counsel may have worked with the Judge over 30 years ago probably isn't enough to conflict out the Judge.

[hardspunned]

I believe I read last week the judge hack was quoted as saying, “I barely knew him”.