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

originally posted by: matafuchs
"Trump was found guilty of sexual abuse". I would bet a MILLION dollars that if I checked all of the MSM sites right now that is what the Headline is.

Probably. It's pretty big news. They make money from viewers.

originally posted by: InachMarbank
How soon does he have to pay this?

My guess, is just after hell freezes over since this is a Kangaroo court like that English lawyer on here seems to be loving.

The strongest evidence in a civil he said she said case from a long time ago, from a jury’s POV is a credible statement by the plaintiff to a third party that was contemporaneous with the alleged event.

I’ve paid no attention to what was actually presented in this case — but in general a jury would look for something like that.

The hearsay exception of “present sense impression” is probably the most relevant hearsay exception in cases like these.

$1.7M or whatever the total damages are is pretty low for a civil case with serious allegations that went all the way to a jury (99.9999% of potential civil cases never reach a jury).

Based on experience with business litigation, this looks like a jury compromise to break a deadlock (for example a 40% of the jury did not agree, but compromised with 40% of the jury at some middle ground to wrap it up).

How long was the trial and how long did the jury deliberate?

the a reply to: LSU2018

a reply to: JohnTitorSociety

Don't know how long the trial took.

Jury deliberation took less than 3 hours.

a reply to: InachMarbank

Scrounger said it better than I could. Trump is rightfully upset about it and can’t keep his mouth shut and will probably make things worse before better. But I like to point out many years of various accusations against him, then magically a few months or years later we find out it was all a Democrat op.

Imagine how different this thread would look if it was Obama. Kinda like how different it would have been if Obama came to his inauguration with 5 kids from 3 different baby mamas. But Trump is just like jesus!

originally posted by: LordAhriman
Imagine how different this thread would look if it was Obama. Kinda like how different it would have been if Obama came to his inauguration with 5 kids from 3 different baby mamas. But Trump is just like jesus!

Would conservatives be elated if Obama was the target of political persecution and was convicted during a sham trial? Sure; I am sure a lot of them would be. You got them there.


Still doesn't make it right.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: network dude
Hmmm
Interesting use of the justice system
Looks like trump just got his ass kicked

Civil court, and not the same standards of proof.

Is that so?
I was referring to changing the statutes of limitations to file a charge in the first place.
Then getting a judge to sign off that it is legit.
Then getting 12 people to vote guilty.

Interesting path to justice.

Also as to the “sex offender status keeps Trump off ballot in some states.”

This is a civil case, no one is registered as a sex offender based on a civil finding.

A civil case, unlike a criminal case has a “preponderance of evidence” standard (shorthand: 51% of the evidence).

A civil case also does not require a unanimous jury, only a majority.

The statute of limitations changes that were passed in relation to some civil and some criminal claims in some states (New York and California being the most prominent) can certainly be debated as to whether they are consistent with due process, however Murder has no statute of limitations and I don’t find anything inherently contradictory with extending it to CSA/rape/etc.

But the judge did not alter the statute of limitations, the relevant state’s legislature did so.

Voted for Trump twice, don’t find the allegation of rape credible in Bergdorf Goodman dressing area credible. It’s not an isolated place with no one around it’s filled with or proximate with people at the time (including a lot of women employees, store security, nearby, other customers, etc.)

Didn’t follow case — only reason I know the Bergdorf Goodman dressing area bit is because my wife mentioned it as seeming absurd based on her experience at the same Bergdorf Goodman, which is consistent with my experience at the same place and similar places.

Interestingly, Trump did not present a defense, and didn’t even show up for court. Perhaps NYS is different, but normally that would result in a directed verdict not a jury verdict — unless he sent a lawyer to appear.

At 3 hours that suggests they never took the rape allegation seriously, probably had a significant majority on the defamation claim, probably split and came to a set of possible compromises prior to deliberation (even though they are technically not supposed to) a reply to: Mantiss2021

originally posted by: dandandat2
Would conservatives be elated if Obama was the target of political persecution and was convicted during a sham trial? Sure; I am sure a lot of them would be. You got them there.

Yes, they absof#ckinglutely would be! While they fantasize about Michelle having a penis.

The difference is, Obama has like 30 less sexual assault accusations against him.

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: dandandat2
Would conservatives be elated if Obama was the target of political persecution and was convicted during a sham trial? Sure; I am sure a lot of them would be. You got them there.

Yes, they absof#ckinglutely would be! While they fantasize about Michelle having a penis.

The difference is, Obama has like 30 less sexual assault accusations against him.

You missed quoting the important part of my post; I'll help you out.

Still doesn't make it right

But I guess when all you care about is scoring partisan political points on an online message board, than Political Persecution isn't such a big deal.

For the rest of us who need to live and raise our children in this society going after the "others" by any means necessary isn't a winning proposition. The only thing it leads to is a decaying society.

a reply to: JohnTitorSociety




"Guilty" would Only Apply if these were Criminal Charges . Given that there is No Statue of Limitations for Rape in New York State , going straight to a Civil Lawsuit Instead of pressing Criminal Charges is a tacit Admission by the Plaintiff that there is No Evidence Beyond her Testimony .This Decision Will be Appealed .....

originally posted by: dandandat2
But I guess when all you care about is scoring partisan political points on an online message board, than Political Persecution isn't such a big deal.

You got me. It's all about that one star I got, in a circle jerk think tank of thousands of people who disagree with me.

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
"Guilty" would Only Apply if these were Criminal Charges . Given that there is No Statue of Limitations for Rape in New York State , going straight to a Civil Lawsuit Instead of pressing Criminal Charges is a tacit Admission by the Plaintiff that there is No Evidence Beyond her Testimony .This Decision Will be Appealed .....

She brought DNA evidence.

originally posted by: JohnTitorSociety
At 3 hours that suggests they never took the rape allegation seriously, probably had a significant majority on the defamation claim, probably split and came to a set of possible compromises prior to deliberation (even though they are technically not supposed to) a reply to: Mantiss2021

You appear to be making quite a few assumptions there.

And you know what they say about what happens when we "assume".



At any rate, the judge has cleared the members of the jury to talk to the media, although he advised against doing so.

Maybe we will learn more.

I’m obviously skeptical of the case based on what little I know and personal experiences at the location of the alleged rape (and my wife’s personal experiences).

That being said, a civilian filing a civil complaint and pursuing it in court is not an admission that no criminal conduct occurred — DA initiates a criminal complaint, sometimes based on a police report from a civilian and sometimes based on a referral by the NYPD in this case or some other law enforcement agency.

Did the plaintiff file a police report? If yes, when? Recently? Contemporaneous with the allegation? Etc.

If the plaintiff never filed a police report, that suggests, at a minimum, there is some question as to why not? It’s not like there would be social opprobrium in NYC for filing a police report against Trump at any point in the past 8 years.

a reply to: Zanti Misfit

originally posted by: LordAhriman
Imagine how different this thread would look if it was Obama. Kinda like how different it would have been if Obama came to his inauguration with 5 kids from 3 different baby mamas. But Trump is just like jesus!

Imagine if Trump and his wives would have aborted all those kids.
He would be a hero to you deranged Liberals.

originally posted by: crankyoldman
She accused him of raping her.

The jury said he didn't rape her.

That normally ends the case.

It will be thrown out on appeal, except, "the walls are closing in" finally.

We got him on accusations from an legit insane women, changed the law to make it happen, paid for a by a visitor to epstein island, tried by a woman actually KICKED OUT of "Me Too" because she attacked women to defend Cuomo, all in a district on record as sworn to get DJT.

They didn't actually get what they wanted. They wanted, neigh demanded, this headline: "Trump Guilty of Rape, Awaiting Criminal Charges in NY," as the entire dem campaign. 100% why they did it, exclusively for the headline. They failed. And soon, that won't matter a drop anyway.

This is the win the TDS folks wanted with russia, perfect call and the rest of the well planned Lawfare Brookings blah blah blah schemes over the course of 7 years!!!! That's it.

Really meditate on that, the most investigated human being ever to walk the earth, ever in human history, needed a completely deranged woman to accuse him of rape 3 decades ago to "get him."

Here is the point. Anyone who celebrates this as a win is as insane as she is, even if you think DJT destroyed the world during his tenure, fine, but this is not a win but the death of anything resembling due process. For those who celebrate this is your hero.

It means now that anyone, anywhere, can be dragged into Civil Court, be bankrupted on the testimony of a mentally deranged lunatic, and there is nothing anyone, anywhere, can do to stop it. Oh, and, thankfully this tactic can be used in criminal cases now too due to J6.

Those cheering this are beyond help, crabs in the bucket accelerating their own demise.

Please everyone reread the above.
It has been a bad day for the Republic. We are losing our country over this, the damage being done is incalculable.

originally posted by: imitator
They timed this just right... wasn't there going to be something about the Biden family on Wednesday?

🤣

That’s hearsay.
They’ll be arresting George Santos though, or at least charging him.
Any idea if Santos used the name Biden, as a pseudonym ?
It’s confusing!