Trump yet again credibly accused of rape

[woolfe9998]

If he doesn't pay her the $5M, he'll be in contempt of court, no? I know some developers and subcontractors sued him after he stiffed them, but idk if they were successful. If so, he'd have been forced to pay them as well to avoid arrest.

A judgment creditor can lien the judgment debtor's properties, garnish wages, and attach bank accounts. If Trump has the assets and she and her lawyers are determined to collect, they'll eventually get it all.

 

[woolfe9998]

I do agree with one comment from Trump's lawyer, that this was a "strange" verdict because she accused him of rape, but they didn't find he committed rape. Yet they found he defamed her when he said she lied...about being raped. They had one version of the story presented to them, that of the plaintiff, as Trump declined to testify, and they decided to accept... part of her story? What made them decide she told the truth about being assaulted, but confabulated the penetration part?

As to Trump's appeal, someone said above it is based on the court's gag order not allowing him to comment on social media. Which is mind numbingly dumb for reasons another poster stated above. But the real appeal issue that I read was the admission into evidence of the Access Hollywood tape. That is at least a debatable issue.

 

[woolfe9998]

lol that will go nowhere.

1) The jury was not permitted to listen to public statements about the trial anyway so by definition his public statements couldn't affect the case.
2) Trump was specifically invited to testify at the trial and declined.

Yup, and what's particularly amusing is if you follow the "logic" of this theory, Trump's argument would essentially amount to his case being prejudiced because the judge didn't allow him to tamper with the jury. I mean, sure the jury was instructed not to read anything about the case, but they still might do it. Which is exactly why the court issued the gag order. The court didn't want Trump to essentially testify over social media, with no ability to cross examine him.

And since any appeal has to prove that the "error" turned the outcome of the case against the appealing party, Trump would have to argue that his case turned south because he wasn't allowed to give unsworn testimony on Truth Social and then change the minds of jurors who ignored a court order not to read anything about the case.

LOL that can't be an actual ground for Trump's appeal. There's no way.

 

[NWRMidnight]

I do agree with one comment from Trump's lawyer, that this was a "strange" verdict because she accused him of rape, but they didn't find he committed rape. Yet they found he defamed her when he said she lied...about being raped. They had one version of the story presented to them, that of the plaintiff, as Trump declined to testify, and they decided to accept... part of her story? What made them decide she told the truth about being assaulted, but confabulated the penetration part?

As to Trump's appeal, someone said above it is based on the court's gag order not allowing him to comment on social media. Which is mind numbingly dumb for reasons another poster stated above. But the real appeal issue that I read was the admission into evidence of the Access Hollywood tape. That is at least a debatable issue.

She may not have understood the criteria of rape, which usually requires forced intercourse. Sexual Assault covers attempted rape and other sexual battery.

 

[JEDI]

E Jean Carroll, longtime columnist has accused the president of raping her in the 90s.

Trump has denied it, saying he never met her in his life. That was immediately proven to be a lie however, as a picture of them together surfaced shortly thereafter.

So to be clear, we have a credible accusation of rape against the president of the United States by a nationally prominent figure, one with contemporaneous confirmation by people who knew her. This is around the 15th or 16th credible accusation of rape, sexual assault or other sexual misconduct against him. Rape is a felony, one that plenty of people are currently in prison for.

What does it take to start impeachment.

After verdict, Trump still claiming he doesnt know her:

Jury finds Trump liable for sexual abuse, awards accuser $5M

A jury has found Donald Trump liable for sexually abusing advice columnist E. Jean Carroll in 1996. Jurors awarded her $5 million in a judgment that could haunt the former president as he campaigns to regain the White House. The verdict was announced in a federal courtroom in New York City on...

apnews.com

pic of Trump and Carroll:

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2023/05/06/02/70631661-12052259-Lawyers_for_E_Jean_Carroll_circled_released_a_portion_of_the_for-a-59_1683338311650.jpg

And the lawyer spin:
I'm glad that Trump wasn't found guilty of being a rapist :rollseyes:

 

[darkswordsman17]

I believe him…I can totally believe he was coked out of his mind, went up to her in the changing room and finger banged her thinking she was his wife.

no, no, I totally believe Jean's version that he recognized her as "that gossip columnist," then asked her to help him pick out clothes for a woman friend. Probably dicked her in the dressing room, no finger fuck.

With classy responses like these I can't imagine why women don't report sexual misconduct and assaults more often.

And most if not all of them, while continuing to defend him, are too cowardly to openly admit they still support him any longer. In other words the more time goes by, the worse look it is to still be a supporter. They've gone from unabashed card-carrying cult members, to 'still-supporting-him-but-lying-about-it'.

'I never said I support him'
'I didn't vote for him'
'I've never been a fan'
'I don't even like the guy'

Look familiar from posts here? Yeah.

Those people have tended to show they're quite ok with rape so I'm not sure why you're surprised. Hell look at the 2 other posters I quoted, who are pretty anti-Turmp and well it was just a bit of finger bangin or "dickin in the dressing room no finger fuck". Honestly I'm starting to wonder if a lot of the latter is because its guys jealous that Turmp gets away with shit like that and that's their actual issue and not the rape/assaults.

 

[woolfe9998]

After verdict, Trump still claiming he doesnt know her:

Jury finds Trump liable for sexual abuse, awards accuser $5M

A jury has found Donald Trump liable for sexually abusing advice columnist E. Jean Carroll in 1996. Jurors awarded her $5 million in a judgment that could haunt the former president as he campaigns to regain the White House. The verdict was announced in a federal courtroom in New York City on...

apnews.com

pic of Trump and Carroll:

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2023/05/06/02/70631661-12052259-Lawyers_for_E_Jean_Carroll_circled_released_a_portion_of_the_for-a-59_1683338311650.jpg

And the lawyer spin:
I'm glad that Trump wasn't found guilty of being a rapist :rollseyes:

He didn't say he was "happy" about it. He said it was "strange." Which is correct. It's a little strange.

As to what Trump is denying, who cares? The man has never told the truth about anything in his entire life, except whenever it benefitted him to do so, which I suspect was rarely.

 

[Pens1566]

I do agree with one comment from Trump's lawyer, that this was a "strange" verdict because she accused him of rape, but they didn't find he committed rape. Yet they found he defamed her when he said she lied...about being raped. They had one version of the story presented to them, that of the plaintiff, as Trump declined to testify, and they decided to accept... part of her story? What made them decide she told the truth about being assaulted, but confabulated the penetration part?

As to Trump's appeal, someone said above it is based on the court's gag order not allowing him to comment on social media. Which is mind numbingly dumb for reasons another poster stated above. But the real appeal issue that I read was the admission into evidence of the Access Hollywood tape. That is at least a debatable issue.

I saw one analysis last night (can't remember who it was though) that the "not guilty" on rape was because it was the one place in her testimony about the encounter that she was unsure of. She said something like she wasn't sure or couldn't tell if he actually got it in. Which, if you think about it a bit, is hilarious and something that more people should be pointing out as a joke.

 

[interchange]

I saw one analysis last night (can't remember who it was though) that the "not guilty" on rape was because it was the one place in her testimony about the encounter that she was unsure of. She said something like she wasn't sure or couldn't tell if he actually got it in. Which, if you think about it a bit, is hilarious and something that more people should be pointing out as a joke.

That makes sense. Under NY law rape requires penile penetration.

Unfortunately the verdict gives Trump more wiggle room to spin the reality of the what the jury found.

 

[VRAMdemon]

My understanding is that Carroll testified she was unable to tell if Trump actually penetrated her with his penis. She felt his fingers penetrate her, but was unable to see/feel if penile penetration occurred. The jury may have believed she was not raped, just assaulted because she couldn’t say for certain about his dick? Think how much that must piss Trump off. Carrol testified, and the jury believed, that she was unable to discern a difference between his finger and his penis.

 

[Pens1566]

My understanding is that Carroll testified she was unable to tell if Trump actually penetrated her with his penis. She felt his fingers penetrate her, but was unable to see/feel if penile penetration occurred. The jury may have believed she was not raped, just assaulted because she couldn’t say for certain about his dick? Think how much that must piss Trump off. Carrol testified, and the jury believed, that she was unable to discern a difference between his finger and his penis.

Yeah, that was my point as well. Essentially boils down to her saying "is it in yet?".

 

[fskimospy]

That makes sense. Under NY law rape requires penile penetration.

Unfortunately the verdict gives Trump more wiggle room to spin the reality of the what the jury found.

While it gives him more room I think that would be a trap. The result of that spin is that people will dispute it and then you end up with a bunch of public arguments and fact checks centered on if he’s a rapist or instead some other sort of sex criminal.

His least damaging defense is and always was that nothing at all happened and this is just mean liberals on yet another ‘witch hunt’. That’s what they’ve stuck with, at least so far.

 

[HomerJS]

One thing that can be said Trump was found guilty by a court of sexual assault.

 

[VRAMdemon]

Looks like Trump is getting tired of all the winning and continues to lie and defame in this epic word salad. This is still the Republican front runner!?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1656109050159824897

How would he have known she wasn’t his type if he didn’t even know who she was? Because his ‘type’ is based purely on physical attributes, which you can tell from a photo. Of course, that he thought it was a picture of wife #2 kind of puts the lie to that statement.

The outcome was “As negative as it could possibly be”? Nope, that would only be if you’d been convicted of a civil charge of rape, which you dodged. Let’s just keep pointing this out: Despite all his whining about people out to get him, and how he can’t get a fair trial, the jury actually did its job, and made a considered decision on the actual issues before them. If he really was being railroaded, there’s no way he’d have skated on the rape part.

 

[VRAMdemon]

Yeah, that was my point as well. Essentially boils down to her saying "is it in yet?".

Yeah, I do believe some states define rape as penile penetration. Some states define rape as penetration by anything, including objects or digits. New York defines it the former way, and Carroll was unable to affirmatively testify that Trump penetrated her with his penis. His fingers she was certain about. The speed of decision suggests the jury found that the evidence is that Trump had obviously at the very least started a sexual assault and accused his victim of lying about it.

Cue the inevitable appeals, delays, media circus involving grifting his followers…

 

[ch33zw1z]

Looks like Trump is getting tired of all the winning and continues to lie and defame in this epic word salad. This is still the Republican front runner!?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1656109050159824897

How would he have known she wasn’t his type if he didn’t even know who she was? Because his ‘type’ is based purely on physical attributes, which you can tell from a photo. Of course, that he thought it was a picture of wife #2 kind of puts the lie to that statement.

The outcome was “As negative as it could possibly be”? Nope, that would only be if you’d been convicted of a civil charge of rape, which you dodged. Let’s just keep pointing this out: Despite all his whining about people out to get him, and how he can’t get a fair trial, the jury actually did its job, and made a considered decision on the actual issues before them. If he really was being railroaded, there’s no way he’d have skated on the rape part.

To have and to hold from this day forward, married to the GOP

 

[Pens1566]

Yeah, I do believe some states define rape as penile penetration. Some states define rape as penetration by anything, including objects or digits. New York defines it the former way, and Carroll was unable to affirmatively testify that Trump penetrated her with his penis. His fingers she was certain about. The speed of decision suggests the jury found that the evidence is that Trump had obviously at the very least started a sexual assault and accused his victim of lying about it.

Cue the inevitable appeals, delays, media circus involving grifting his followers…

It was federal court though. Not sure how that gets sorted out in regards to what the standard is.

Either way, we're saying the same thing.

 

[interchange]

One thing that can be said Trump was found guilty by a court of sexual assault.

Change guilty to liable.

Should be noted that the evidentiary standard in civil court is preponderance of the evidence instead of beyond reasonable doubt, although it is even possible the jury would have convicted based on the evidence presented if instead this were a criminal trial.

 

[Stopsignhank]

Looks like Trump is getting tired of all the winning and continues to lie and defame in this epic word salad. This is still the Republican front runner!?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1656109050159824897

How would he have known she wasn’t his type if he didn’t even know who she was? Because his ‘type’ is based purely on physical attributes, which you can tell from a photo. Of course, that he thought it was a picture of wife #2 kind of puts the lie to that statement.

The outcome was “As negative as it could possibly be”? Nope, that would only be if you’d been convicted of a civil charge of rape, which you dodged. Let’s just keep pointing this out: Despite all his whining about people out to get him, and how he can’t get a fair trial, the jury actually did its job, and made a considered decision on the actual issues before them. If he really was being railroaded, there’s no way he’d have skated on the rape part.

Can she sue him for this again? A jury found him guilty for saying things like this and he is still saying it.

 

[fskimospy]

Can she sue him for this again? A jury found him guilty for saying things like this and he is still saying it.

Yep. Every defamatory statement is new potential liability. It would be pretty unfortunate if you sued someone for defamation and won that it gave them the green light to continue defaming you without consequence.

 

[UNCjigga]

My understanding is that Carroll testified she was unable to tell if Trump actually penetrated her with his penis. She felt his fingers penetrate her, but was unable to see/feel if penile penetration occurred. The jury may have believed she was not raped, just assaulted because she couldn’t say for certain about his dick? Think how much that must piss Trump off. Carrol testified, and the jury believed, that she was unable to discern a difference between his finger and his penis.

Yeah, this was my understanding too, hence the vulgar "finger banging" comment.

 

[Muse]

With classy responses like these I can't imagine why women don't report sexual misconduct and assaults more often.



Those people have tended to show they're quite ok with rape so I'm not sure why you're surprised. Hell look at the 2 other posters I quoted, who are pretty anti-Turmp and well it was just a bit of finger bangin or "dickin in the dressing room no finger fuck". Honestly I'm starting to wonder if a lot of the latter is because its guys jealous that Turmp gets away with shit like that and that's their actual issue and not the rape/assaults.

I don't envy Trump in any way shape or form. Or you, bozo.

 

[woolfe9998]

I saw one analysis last night (can't remember who it was though) that the "not guilty" on rape was because it was the one place in her testimony about the encounter that she was unsure of. She said something like she wasn't sure or couldn't tell if he actually got it in. Which, if you think about it a bit, is hilarious and something that more people should be pointing out as a joke.

LOL you mean she wasn't clear if it was his dick or one of his short fingers? Yeah that's pretty funny.

 

[ch33zw1z]

LOL you mean she wasn't clear if it was his dick or one of his short fingers? Yeah that's pretty funny.

Sounds like Ms. Daniels wasn’t lying

 

[eelw]

Cues sideshow Bob meme