Posted on 01/28/2024 8:10:45 AM PST by The_Media_never_lie
Donald Trump’s lawyers will use an “insane” and previously unknown “conflict of interest” between E. Jean Carroll’s lawyer and the judge presiding over her defamation case against the former president as the basis of their appeal seeking to toss the eye-popping $83.3 million jury verdict, The Post has learned.
Trump lawyer Alina Habba said she was unaware Manhattan federal Judge Lewis Kaplan and Carroll’s lawyer Roberta Kaplan worked together in the early 1990s at the same powerhouse white-shoe law firm until Saturday, when asked about it by Post columnist Charles Gasparino, who was told by a source that the judge was once Roberta Kaplan’s “mentor.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
I would think the fact the judge in this case would not allow Trump to defend himself in any way would be a basis for appeal as well.
Or the prosecutor had communications between themselves and Whitehouse counsel. Election interference anyone? And the fact Carroll has made baseless claims against other rich people as well.
You would think that Judges have an Honor Code that would cause them to excuse themselves when situations like that occur. Oh well, I guess honor is something Ancient.
So, once a judge tells you that E. Jean Carroll’s lies are the truth, you can no longer say that those lies are lies? Because if you do you’ll owe her $83 million?
In no other world (but Bidenworld) is this a two-decision $88.5 million dollar case.
Lawyers will be telling clients WRT the Trump defamation decision:
<><>regardless of how absurd an accusation may be,
<><>no matter the falsity of the charges,
<><>if you deny it, you can be dragged into court
<><>a politically weaponized judge and jury will rule against you bigtime.
Each justice or judge of the United States shall take the following oath or affirmation before performing the duties of his office:28 U.S. Code § 453 - Oaths of justices and judges“I, ___ ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as ___ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”
(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 907; Pub. L. 101–650, title IV, § 404, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5124.)
(underline emphasis mine)
Judge Kaplan should have recused himself. But given his conduct during the trial I guess that was a naive sentiment.
Indeed. It's sickening.
“previously unknown”?????
It wasn’t “unknown” to THEM!
The more his enemies think they are destroyin him, the more I support him.
Note to self: if I ever come back in another life as a woman. Make main goal to get alone with a rich man and accuse him of rape.
Then hope for millions in a settlement or sue for defamation if he denies it.
Only in Murica?
That is basically true. Once a court has established something as a matter of credibility or fact, no other court will alter that finding. You need to find a legal error, not factual.
If there was a conflict of interest, it should have been raised during the trial, however, former underlings and colleagues appear before judges all of the time.
What Trump needs is better attorneys.
Not talking about changing a finding of fact in a judicial setting.
I’m talking about contradicting a prior finding of fact in public discourse and being dinged $83 million for not agreeing with a judge’s lunacy when you know better because it was your life, not the judge’s life.
Yep.
Somebody is lying.
“This is so wrong, on so many ways. However, that being said, it makes me wonder if it even matters that this is obviously wrong. Our whole legal and political system seems to be unraveling.”
There’s always the hope... that the ‘next’ judge hearing the appeal might actually be a judge... vs. another leftist activist hack. Hope springs.
I hope this is not the only basis of appeal. That corrupt judge had so many egregious rulings that he should be overturned on those, as well as being sanctioned and removed from the bench.
“Our whole legal and political system seems to be unraveling.”
Politics over Justice. This is what happens when you change from a system of LAWS to a system of MEN. It becomes a tool to destroy your enemies. How else do you explain a damages award of $83 Million dollars to a woman who would not have earned that much is 20 lifetimes?
by that reasoning EVERY convicted criminal that proclaims they are innocent is guilty of defamation and liable from the victims!
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.