Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

E. Jean Carroll Admits to Deleting Evidence Under Subpoena – Clinton Judge Kaplan Rushes to Her Defense!
GATEWAYPUNDIT ^ | 1/17/2024 | cristina laila

Posted on 01/17/2024 5:13:35 PM PST by bitt

President Trump appeared in court on Wednesday as E. Jean Carroll testified in a trial where the jury will decide how much Trump has to pay for his so-called ‘defamatory’ statements about her.

Judge Lewis Kaplan, a Clinton appointee, previously ruled that Trump is liable for defamatory statements he made about E. Jean Carroll after she accused him of rape.

In 2019, E. Jean Carroll alleged Donald Trump raped her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in the 1990s.

Trump has denied the allegations and called E. Jean Carroll a “whack job” who’s “not my type.”

Under cross-examination by Trump’s lawyer Alina Habba, E. Jean Carroll admitted she deleted emails under subpoena.

Judge Kaplan ran interference for Carroll.

Habba: You said you receive death threats daily – but you deleted then until trial? Explain what you mean. Judge Kaplan: Explain what she means by what? Habba: When did you stop deleting death threats? Carroll: I had not received how many there were.

— Inner City Press (@innercitypress) January 17, 2024

President Trump’s attorney Alina Habba asked Carroll if she received a subpoena.

“Yes,” Carroll replied before admitting she deleted emails.

Habba: So you have the death threats? Carroll: I deleted them. Habba: So you- Carroll's lawyer: Asked and answered. Habba: This is a very important question Carroll's lawyer: I object to the commentary too

— Inner City Press (@innercitypress) January 17, 2024

Carroll admitted to deleting emails under subpoena because she didn’t want to upset her lawyers.

(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: deletingevidence; ejeancarroll; harassment; lawfare; trump; undersubpoena
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-37 last
To: bitt

Bkmk


21 posted on 01/17/2024 7:11:56 PM PST by sauropod (The obedient always think of themselves as virtuous rather than cowardly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dforest

Is Kelly Anne Conway still married to that Trump hater?


22 posted on 01/17/2024 7:35:08 PM PST by Blue Highway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Blue Highway

No.


23 posted on 01/17/2024 7:39:37 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: bitt

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/billionaire-dem-donor-defends-bankrolling-trump-accusers-rape-lawsuit-judge-seals-funding-docs

A Democrat Megadonor is bankrolling this travesty. Judge Kaplan has much to answer for. Disgusting.


24 posted on 01/17/2024 7:44:50 PM PST by Chgogal (Welcome to Fuhrer Biden's Weaponized Fascist Banana Republic! It's the road to hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bitt

The jury will consider that she had destroyed subpoenaed evidence.


25 posted on 01/17/2024 8:13:33 PM PST by Candor7 (Ask not for whom Trump Trolls,He trolls for thee!),<img src="" width=500</img><a href="">tag</a>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dforest

Indeed


26 posted on 01/17/2024 8:24:25 PM PST by Ladysforest (Racism, misogyny, bigotry, xenophobia and vulgarity - with just a smattering of threats and violence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: All
Intentional spoliation can be grounds for dismissal

“When a party alters, loses or destroys key evidence before it can be examined by the other party’s expert, the court should dismiss the pleadings of the party responsible for the spoliation” Squitieri v. City of New York, 248 A.D.2d 201, 202 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

27 posted on 01/17/2024 8:26:36 PM PST by thegagline (Sic semper tyrannis! Goldwater in 2024)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bitt

What is spoliation of evidence?
Spoliation of evidence is the intentional or negligent alteration, hiding, withholding or destruction of pieces of evidence relevant to a trial by a party connected to the case. Manipulation or destruction can occur before or after filing or data preservation notices or at any other point. Any relevant parties – including targets, custodians, attorneys, analysts and/or investigators – can cause spoliation. It is not uncommon for custodians to engage in improper data collection efforts during self-collections that significantly impact the validity of evidence. Spoliation often afflicts metadata, a key piece of information embedded within data files that helps determine specific timestamps, ownership, file access history and more. Many times, when spoliation occurs, original data is permanently and negatively impacted; this can have significant impacts on an investigation and, ultimately, the entirety of a case.

Knowing what to do when crucial evidence is destroyed
Federal statutes criminalize the purposeful alteration or destruction of evidence to influence a trial. Preservation notices are crucial to alerting all parties of their obligation to properly maintain and protect applicable data. Failing to properly protect or preserve data can result in penalties such as imprisonment or the payment of legal fees to the injured/opposing party. It is critical that thought be given to where data may be stored and any secondary or tertiary locations where data may be duplicated, shared or referenced. Often, time is of the essence because of varying retention periods, security controls, backup schedules and automated deletions. Any action, even data hiding , can be considered spoliation and puts parties at risk of penalties from the court.


28 posted on 01/17/2024 8:32:27 PM PST by rottndog (What comes after America?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Taxman

ping


29 posted on 01/17/2024 8:49:14 PM PST by Taxman ((SAVE AMERICA! VOTE REPUBLICAN IN 2024! SAVE AMERICA!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Amazingly difficult to permanently delete ANYTHING without a complete reformat!


30 posted on 01/17/2024 8:53:43 PM PST by 5th MEB (1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Blue Highway

No.


31 posted on 01/18/2024 12:38:38 AM PST by vivenne (⁹)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: bitt

You mean wipe it with a cloth?


32 posted on 01/18/2024 12:50:50 AM PST by greenishness
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bitt

Spoliation of evidence must be construed in favor of the opposing party. Highly improper for a Judge to tell a jury to ignore this fact.


33 posted on 01/18/2024 1:03:03 AM PST by WASCWatch ( WASC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Candor7

A jury also said he was guilty despite there being no evidence to back up her accusations

Justice is dead in New York city


34 posted on 01/18/2024 1:31:29 AM PST by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: digger48

So many appeals to happen.......Justice in the State of New York is indeed dead. It soon may be back to trial by combat, the way things are going.


35 posted on 01/18/2024 1:45:22 AM PST by Candor7 (Ask not for whom Trump Trolls,He trolls for thee!),<img src="" width=500</img><a href="">tag</a>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: bitt

President Trump’s attorney Alina Habba asked Carroll if she received a subpoena.

“Yes,” Carroll replied before admitting she deleted emails.

Habba: So you have the death threats? Carroll: I deleted them. Habba: So you- Carroll’s lawyer: Asked and answered. Habba: This is a very important question Carroll’s lawyer: I object to the commentary too

— Inner City Press (@innercitypress) January 17, 2024

Carroll admitted to deleting emails under subpoena because she didn’t want to upset her lawyers.


36 posted on 01/18/2024 6:56:23 AM PST by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bitt

“Trump has denied the allegations and called E. Jean Carroll a “whack job” who’s “not my type.”

So this opinion of Trump’s is “defamatory”? Really, she is not a whack job, and is his type. But he raped her anyway. Accusing him of rape is not defamatory? That at least is a factual allegation. 1. That coitus occurred. 2. That she did not consent. 3. That he went and dood it after she said she didn’t consent. Pretty defamatory, if untrue.


37 posted on 01/18/2024 10:43:45 AM PST by Eleutheria5 (Every Goliath has his David. Child in need of a CGM system. https://gofund.me/6452dbf1. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-37 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson