There's A Verdict in the E. Jean Carroll/Trump Case

originally posted by: underpass61

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: neo96
I wonder how much Tara Reade will get.

Second verse.

I think it was the Hollywood Access tape that put the nail in Trump's coffin. When there's a tape of Biden bragging about how easily he can get away with sexual assault, Then Tara Read might have a chance in court.

How about a video of Joe saying, "Nobody f*^ks with a Biden"?

Or threatening Ukraine Officials while he was VP 😎

a reply to: scrounger

Jury disagreed with you, and Trump's legal team.

Trump didn't show up.

Shout in capitals all you like.

Boo Hoo.

If was me, I'd have shown up and defended myself.

Not have bogged off to Scotland to play golf?

a reply to: NorthOfStuffx2

a reply to: LSU2018

Your post reminded me of this…

Oh how I wish I could just keep clicking the star button on this post all night ...

Your comical video precisely sums up the evidence in this case

a reply to: xuenchen

On what grounds? Remember that you can't appeal a decision because you disagree with the jury's decision.

Well, I guess you could but the appellate court will reject your case.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

There's a diary by his daughter ... would that help

originally posted by: 1947boomer

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: Mahogany

" It's pretty simple -- he couldn't be bothered to even SHOW UP in court to defend himself against rape allegations and the defamation that followed. He was asked to provide DNA evidence which could have COMPLETELY exonerated him and this whole thing would have been stopped early. He refused to."

Hmm... So tell me . What would you have done there if You were in Mr. Trump's Shoes Knowing in your Own Mind those Allegation were Not True ? I surmise he Reasoned he would be " Set Up " for Other Erroneous Charges if he could Not Thoroughly Convince a Judge or a " Suspect " Chosen Jury of his Innocence of that Charge . In a U.S. Court of Law he is Entitled to " Presumed Innocence " Until Proven by Substantive Evidence to the Contrary . I would then Assume his Lawyers Counseled him on taking the Action that he did in Order for the Law to Force his hand into Appearing in Court under an indictment that was based on Substantive Evidence .

How would DNA evidence exonerate him?

She kept the dress she was wearing the day the attack occurred and it had a stain on it--much like the stain on Monica Lewinsky's dress. They did a DNA analysis on the stain and have the records of it. A DNA sample from Trump would show whether the DNA on the dress came from him or not.

And there's no proof the dress was hers "at the time". That's where the Judge erred on allowing it as evidence 😁

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: carewemust
How much of the $2 million dollars will Carrol's Attorneys and the IRS get?

Zero when the case gets dismissed on appeal 😁

And what might the grounds for an appeal be?

You have to have grounds before an appeal will be heard.

What would Trumps grounds be?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Your faster than I am X

But the point remains.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: scrounger

Jury disagreed with you, and Trump's legal team.

that makes it right or legal? need i remind you that back in the racist south white men were found innocent of murder inspite of the evidence you supported it? i bet not. how about the officers in the rodney king first trial found innocent.. were you supporting them too smh

Trump didn't show up.

ok and? show me EXACTLY WHERE IN THE LAW is proof of guilt? last i checked INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY IN COURT OF LAW is the right.. not "if you dont show up or plead the fifth your guilty because you have to prove your innocent".. again UP TO THE ACCUSER TO PROVE with facts guilt.. moving on

Shout in capitals all you like.

when one has to resort to grammar police you lost the argument.. caps , along with italics, quotations, size, fonts, ect are written way to emphasise point(s) and been used since written communicaiton.. to which a post is.. doesnt credit or discredit a point.. hate to break it to you/ moving on

Boo Hoo.

ill let this childish / trollish comment stand for itself

If was me, I'd have shown up and defended myself.

which is your right/choice.. last i checked your lawyer would (given NO EXACT FACTS/DATE given) and that the procecutor will just go for character assasination you keep your mouth shut too.. but hey your not trump and your not accused of this.. try again

Not have bogged off to Scotland to play golf?

doesnt matter where he went..

she DID NOT HAVE ANY EXACT DATE OR EVEN YEAR for facts.

she didnt prove anything nor gave anything for trump to refute except didnt happen
so AGAIN WHERE IS THE PROOF
PSST rape victims do lie about it and how many have suffered because of it


where is your proof


scrounger

a reply to: xuenchen

Did Trump's legal team ever dispute that point?

Apparently not.

So there was no reason for the judge to disallow.


And hence, not a basis for appeal.

a reply to: Mantiss2021

Apparently because he wasn't allowed to present his own case. Even though he was given every chance to do so. Then the Court was biased against him, witch hunt and fake news.

That sort of thing.

originally posted by: Mantiss2021

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: carewemust
How much of the $2 million dollars will Carrol's Attorneys and the IRS get?

Zero when the case gets dismissed on appeal 😁

And what might the grounds for an appeal be?

You have to have grounds before an appeal will be heard.

What would Trumps grounds be?

oh maybe she cant give EXACT DATES (hell even year) when it happened for him to defend or even show if he was there or not.

how about that?

scrounger

originally posted by: AllAnIllusion
a reply to: Sookiechacha

There's a diary by his daughter ... would that help

Help? Who? In what context?

originally posted by: RonnieJersey
I'm a woman and don't believe these women who put themselves in place, then when something happens they cry 'rape' or whatever.
Still Voting For Trump 2024!!

Looking forward to seeing how much "Trump 2024" money is raised, due to this latest attack on America's Super Hero.

I'm sending an additional $20 before bedtime, just to give Anti-MAGA people the middle finger.

a reply to: scrounger

Those aren't grounds for appeal. Trump must show his rights were violated or there was judicial misconduct.

Once again, simply disagreeing with how the jury interpreted the evidence is not grounds for appeal.

a reply to: carewemust

I wonder how much of your money will be used as evidence against Trump when Jack Smith brings his wire fraud charges against him.

a reply to: Xcalibur254


How funny that this weirdo finally got her day in court (I guess?).

So Trump, who at the time could have just about any woman he wanted (he was still a Democrat then right?) sees some lanky gal with possible mental illness in a department store and just like a television show she watched, he did the EXACT same thing as what she saw on the television show and apparently called and told 2 people the story. Yeah right...

God, can we PLEASE let major cities form their own city states? I mean they are like the bad kid that drags the whole crew down.

But I forget, they rule us, we dont rule them. Time is slipping away. America is pretty much done. What will you do when that happens?

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: 1947boomer

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: Mahogany

" It's pretty simple -- he couldn't be bothered to even SHOW UP in court to defend himself against rape allegations and the defamation that followed. He was asked to provide DNA evidence which could have COMPLETELY exonerated him and this whole thing would have been stopped early. He refused to."

Hmm... So tell me . What would you have done there if You were in Mr. Trump's Shoes Knowing in your Own Mind those Allegation were Not True ? I surmise he Reasoned he would be " Set Up " for Other Erroneous Charges if he could Not Thoroughly Convince a Judge or a " Suspect " Chosen Jury of his Innocence of that Charge . In a U.S. Court of Law he is Entitled to " Presumed Innocence " Until Proven by Substantive Evidence to the Contrary . I would then Assume his Lawyers Counseled him on taking the Action that he did in Order for the Law to Force his hand into Appearing in Court under an indictment that was based on Substantive Evidence .

How would DNA evidence exonerate him?

She kept the dress she was wearing the day the attack occurred and it had a stain on it--much like the stain on Monica Lewinsky's dress. They did a DNA analysis on the stain and have the records of it. A DNA sample from Trump would show whether the DNA on the dress came from him or not.

And there's no proof the dress was hers "at the time". That's where the Judge erred on allowing it as evidence 😁

Apparently, you still believe the New York judge on this case is one with integrity.

a reply to: scrounger

It was a civil defamation trial.

Proof of guilt did not apply.

Racist south?

What has that got to do with anything?

The jury heard evidence.

I don't need to produce any proof.

I wasn't involved.

Rape victims lie?!!!

If that's what you think, I feel sorry for you.

Actually, more like disgusted?