Posted on 05/10/2023 5:54:38 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
The jury in the E. Jean Carroll v. Trump case ruled on Tuesday afternoon that former President Trump is liable for sexual abuse and defamation charges. While Trump announced ahead of a verdict he planned to appeal the decision, Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley unpacked the case on "The Story" and weighed the "biggest problem" the president faces in an appeal.
JONATHAN TURLEY : That dog won't hunt. If that's the argument on appeal, then it's going to be a rather quick appeal. There are other issues here that he might appeal on. Judge Kaplan was really quite yielding on the demands for a witness testimony. He allowed in a lot of evidence, including the Hollywood access tape and these other witnesses. Obviously, Trump had never been convicted or found guilty, either criminally or civilly in those cases. So there was a lot of evidence here that the defense could say should not have been brought into the case or should have been handled differently. The problem for President Trump is that this is a mix question of law and fact. There are some legal issues here, like the ones I mentioned about allowing in certain types of testimony. But when it comes to factual determinations, the court of appeals tends to be leery of overturning those. Jury decisions are really sort of iron plated because you have to show that they were clearly erroneous. They're not going to be able to show that here with all this testimony. So the only way to really unravel this is to say that the jury heard things that they shouldn't have been allowed to hear because they were too prejudicial.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
.
No Year. No date.
Joke.
Didn’t he have a deposition though? I thought they played that at the trial. If he HAD testified, that would have opened him up to questioning about other women who’ve accused him of sexual misconduct over the years, like many wealthy men have experienced.
RE: No Year. No date.
No eyewitness.
If it happened ( DOUBTFUL) , why didn’t she scream for help?
.
Why didn’t she go right to the Cashier or store security?
Why didn’t she call Police the next day?
It’s a made up story.
The woman has written of her Rape fantasies.
.
And I imagine they will come forward...there are books to be wrote!!!!
He could have paraded an army of witnesses to his fanatical aversion to germs in front of the jury if he had wanted to.
He and his lawyer did everything possible to get him to lose.
The fact that the law was changed by gov hochul in order to facilitate the charge against PDJT should invalidate the entire thing. How tf is this even constitutional to make a temporary law...that expires in a year...to attack a presidential candidate?? I just dont get it.
His deposition was horrible! The man is his own worse enemy. He said things that his attorney would have strongly advised him not to say. But Trump in his egomania thinks he can never be wrong.
And he is delusional. Witness his obvious lie that the court employees were crying and apologizing to him during his arraignment on his other charges.
I like the policies he represents but he has a self destructive narcissistic personality disorder which is ruining him.
Such a shame! If he gets the nomination the Dims will win in a landslide. They wont even have to cheat this time!
I have great respect for Turley. However, to what was he going to testify that wasn’t already in his deposition? (And he did himself no favors in that deposition.)
He had no defense other than, “I did not do what she is accusing me of doing,” because by her failure to even know the YEAR in which the alleged incident occurred, how else could Trump refute it? SHE produced no independent witnesses to the alleged incident, and Trump — not even being able to identify witnesses who could show that he wasn’t even in the country on the day she claims because she doesn’t even know WHEN it allegedly happened! Trump was put in an impossible position; and I think, intentionally.
If I were Trump, I wouldn’t have testified, either. Unless I was asked only one question on direct, and that would be:
“Did you touch her in a sexual manner without her consent?” And a simple response: “No.” In which case my attorney would say, “No further questions.” Absent a cross-examination on credibility, it reduces the entire case to he said/she said.
But, a NYC jury was going to nail him no matter what.
Even more than that, they would be looking for ANY mistake he made to turn over to the Feckless BI for prosecution. He would have been crazy to testify, IMHO.
if the jury found him not guilty of rape, doesn’t mean they thought she perjured herself?
I tend to agree with Turley.
Trump is famous for self sabotaging. And got picking poor legal representation. At least this one didn’t have hair dye dripping down his face.
RE: if the jury found him not guilty of rape, doesn’t mean they thought she perjured herself?
The Jury verdict really makes little logical sense to me.
Firstly, E. Jean Carrol does not remember the date ( even the year ) when it occured.
Secondly, there were no eyewitnesses even to Trump being in the place where she alleged they went in together.
Thirdly, Even if the rape did occur ( doubtful ), why didn’t she SCREAM? Report it to security?
Fourthly, The Jury decided that it was NOT rape ( as opposed to her testimony ), but decided sexual assault did occur.... HOW DID THEY DETERMINE THAT? Her accusation was NOT just sexual assault, it was RAPE. They did not believe the RAPE accusation, yet, decided a sexual assault occured?
It’s Just bizzare how they made this weird verdict.
It wasn’t a criminal trial, there was no guilty or not guilty. Most likely, they didn’t find her entirely believable, but since the defense didn’t give them anything, they split the difference. If Trump’s side had a credible strategy, the plaintiff would have gotten nothing.
So you contend he wanted to lose?
You can’t prove a negative. You certainly cannot prove a negative on an unspecified date and year. This trial was a travesty. How could Trump prove he was elsewhere on the date when there is no actual date of the assault specified?
Trump had no chance to get justice in this trial and was justified in skipping the lynching party.
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.