Posted on 05/09/2023 12:18:04 PM PDT by Morgana
A jury has found that Donald Trump sexually abused E. Jean Carroll.
The panel of six men and three women also found that Trump injured advice columnist Carroll in a Manhattan Bergdorf Goodman dressing room and defamed her, ordering the former President to pay her $5million in damages.
Trump has been accused of sexual misconduct or assault by more than two dozen women, but this has so far been the only case to end up before a jury.
Carroll, 79, sued for battery under the Adult Survivors Act, a law passed in New York that allowed a one year window for sexual assault claims normally outside of the statute of limitations.
Her claim for defamation was based on statements made by Trump, 76, when he was President and posts to Truth Social, his own social network in which he called her a liar.
Over two weeks the jury heard emotional testimony from three accusers and two of Carroll's friends, among other witnesses, while Trump himself was a no show.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
That’s not how an appeal works. The trial court is the venue that hears and determines facts. You can’t just hold back testimony during the trial and expect to present it to the appellate court. They don’t do that. The appellate court (generally, with some very limited exceptions) only looks at whether the trial court correctly applied the law. An appellate hearing doesn’t look anything like the trial. There’s no witness stand and no witnesses. It’s just the opposing attorneys making legal arguments before a panel of judges, with the losing side arguing why the trial court made some fundamental legal error and the winning side trying to refute the loser’s argument by explaining why the trial court did not err..
Now if the trial court did make a significant legal error, then there’s hope. Who knows in this case, but it seems to me that what the New York legislature did by just arbitrarily opening up a new one-year window for all kinds of screwed-up women to make unsubstantiated, decades-old allegations against men they hate should be unconstitutional. It seems like a gross miscarriage of justice to enable one person to accuse another of something, so long after the alleged incident that there is nothing but rank speculation that can be offered as “evidence”, and to not even require the plaintiff to demonstrate any actual injury. My suspicion, though, is that if the law is unconstitutional it is something they the trial and appellate courts cannot change, and would require an appeal to the state Supreme Court or more likely a lawsuit against the State of New York.
Those are just my very non-lawyer thoughts.
But no to the rape so this is gonna be thrown out on appeal you can’t be found not liable on rape but liable for sexual abuse
It’s a legal strategy, not an error.
Interupted by a scene outside. Neil Armstrong in a motorcade on his way to being honored at The Mansion House in the City of London. Silly me! Should have accused the boss of rape thirty years later.
(Always loved the American space program!!)
How in the world can it be upheld? Because she can’t remember or give a specific date or even year, that nullifys Trump’s ability to mount a defense. He cannot provide exculpatory evidence.
By not pinning down the alleged assault to a specific date and time, Trump was denied the ability to mount an alibi defense, and therefore it made no sense to appear directly to testify on his behalf. His lawyers should have been perfectly capable of making the argument that Carroll refused to give a date because any date she picked would have been alibied.
. -PJ
“this is gonna be thrown out on appeal you can’t be found not liable on rape but liable for sexual abuse it’s the same accusation”
They are not the same, they are two separate statutes in New York. Rape means forced intercourse, sexual abuse means forced sexual touching. Jury believed abuse was proven, but not rape, that’s not grounds for appeal in of itself.
No, Trump wasn’t found guilty, he was found liable. Perhaps you should brush up on the law before you comment.
You are absolutely right but that’s not Trump’s personality. He will always be the guy laughing it up with Imus and Stern. Imus got tired of it and broke it off. His deposition kind of makes Barr’s point more believable.
Our Lord, Jesus Christ Himself wasn't going to sway this judge/jury. Step back and advance.
counter-law-fare.
On my satellite system, I can receive several “raw news feed’ channels... What the cameras and microphones in the field see and hear from remote locations, before the video and audio gets modified by the editors and producers and spinners.
The hordes of reporters standing in front of the courthouse hoping for interviews are ecstatic: “We Finally Got Him!!!!”
can anyone say ex post facto?
Which is why all of those Antifa goons are rotting away in jail in New York, right? /s
how stupid are you??....he admitted he was wrong in 2016 and it worked...this time, he actually agreed about grabbing women by the puzzy...and this is exactly what this nutcase was claiming he did. Sounds like you need some kind of therapy.
Oh, I forgot...”as a party, that’s just not who we are.”
And OJ wasn't convicted of murder, either. He was found liable for wrongful death ...
At least there was some credible evidence in that case.
This? Calling it BS is an insult to actual BS.
i believe that heterosexual men would be inclined to give any man in trump’s situation the benefit of a doubt.
with the jury composed as it was, apparently that did not happen among the men on the jury.
what kind of men would be virulently pro female plaintiff in a he-said-she-said case?
one could posit that one possibility would be if some all of the men who decided against trump were not heterosexual.
You can’t bring up new facts on an appeal.
Basically the jury found that he grabbed and groped her. That’s battery but not rape.
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.