25 Reason Trump won't pay a dime to E Carrol...

[rightwinger]

Based on an allegation that couldn’t be proven.


Trump did what anyone would do when accused of rape, he claimed he didn’t do it. You all are apparently of the mindset that if someone is accused of something and they deny it, then that is defamation. That’s absurd. He, like anyone else, has a right to deny an allegation made against them, and just because a court found him “liable for sexual assault” that never was proven, that doesn’t mean he gives up the right to proclaim his innocence.

That’s what you all don’t seem to get, the sexual assault case was never proven with any kind of evidence, trump still maintains that he didn’t do it. After the trial was over, all the lefty media outlets were still claiming he raped her, so naturally he kept denying it.

again, if I were trump, I’d launch a massive lawsuit against all of the media outlets that kept claiming he raped her and I’d sue e Jean Carroll, all for defamation. Unless someone can offer up some proof.

The jury considered both sides and determined Trump was not being truthful.
E Jean Carrol subjected herself to hours of cross examination while Trump just sat on the sidelines and mocked her.

 

[ThisIsMe]

The civil courts have worked just fine for centuries.

I’m sure they have, when someone gets a fair trial. This was not a fair trial, and the judgment was excessive.

By those standards, tara reid could sue Biden in civil court and she would have to do is get 2 friends to testify that he assaulted her…and ban, she’s a rich lady.

That’s exactly what you all are saying.

Does that sound like fairness and justice?

 

[rightwinger]

I’m sure they have, when someone gets a fair trial. This was not a fair trial, and the judgment was excessive.

By those standards, tara reid could sue Biden in civil court and she would have to do is get 2 friends to testify that he assaulted her…and ban, she’s a rich lady.

That’s exactly what you all are saying.

Does that sound like fairness and justice?

And Tara Reid would have to go through hours of cross examination like Carrol did

 

[j-mac]

The jury considered both sides and determined Trump was not being truthful.
E Jean Carrol subjected herself to hours of cross examination while Trump just sat on the sidelines and mocked her.

Awwww….poor baby…She deserved to be mocked…Bringing unprovable claims she got from a Law and order episode is laughable…

This reeks of DNC set up….

 

[ThisIsMe]

Also, he never said he molested anyone. He said they “LET” you. He was talking about women being attracted to the celebrity.

That's him saying they "let you." And he's a sexual predator. Apparently, not all women let him.

What SHE did was ACTUAL defamation, and, by the rules that were just dispensed, as long as trump can bring two buddies to say he didn’t touch her, he would win that case.

Nope, she didn't defame him. A court found he sexually assaulted her. And he can't bring two friends to deny her account. Trump already said he never met her.

For that reason, I would expect the appeal to overturn it. The judgement is excessive and frivolous, and was an obvious hit job by a liberal judge and jury

Oh? On what grounds do you think he'll be granted an appeal? Can't be based on losing by a preponderance of the evidence as that is the standard bar to meet. Doubtful it will be over an excessive judgement since the judgement was originally only $5m. It's $83m for punative reasons because he continued attacking her. He can't help himself. He has a history of thus, like he dud with Rosie O'Donnell. At most, he might be able to get the judgement reduced. But more likely than that, he will continue attacking Carroll and she'll sue him again for even more. Don't forget, he can't restrain himself.

That's him saying they "let you."

That’s HER saying he raped her…

Nope, she didn't defame him. A court found he sexually assaulted her

And that is where the defamation started. From her damaging his reputation by making a claim she had no evidence for.

And he can't bring two friends to deny her account. Trump already said he never met her.

No, but he can find two friends to testify that “we’ve known trump all our lives and how he really talks in private, and he’s a good upstanding family man who would never do anything like this”, remember, preponderance of evidence? He doesn’t need to PROVE that that is the case, all he has to do is find a sympathetic jury who would BELIEVE he said that.

Can't be based on losing by a preponderance of the evidence as that is the standard bar to meet.

As my previous post said, all he has to do is use preponderance of evidence that e Jean Carrol lied and that none of his closest friends would actually believe he would do it, and that the previous court was biased. Again, all it takes is for him to find a jury that would believe what trumps friends say is more likely true than not and he can sue her. That’s how flimsy preponderance of evidence is.

But more likely than that, he will continue attacking Carroll and she'll sue him again for even more.

Probably not, I don’t think he has said anything about her lately. But, the appeal will be to a higher court, most likely all the way to the Supreme Court, to have both judgments overturned.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Based on an allegation that couldn’t be proven.


Trump did what anyone would do when accused of rape, he claimed he didn’t do it. You all are apparently of the mindset that if someone is accused of something and they deny it, then that is defamation. That’s absurd. He, like anyone else, has a right to deny an allegation made against them, and just because a court found him “liable for sexual assault” that never was proven, that doesn’t mean he gives up the right to proclaim his innocence.

That’s what you all don’t seem to get, the sexual assault case was never proven with any kind of evidence, trump still maintains that he didn’t do it. After the trial was over, all the lefty media outlets were still claiming he raped her, so naturally he kept denying it.

again, if I were trump, I’d launch a massive lawsuit against all of the media outlets that kept claiming he raped her and I’d sue e Jean Carroll, all for defamation. Unless someone can offer up some proof.

FPOTUS#45 did sue Carroll for defamation.

That case was dismissed because a jury determined that FPOSTUS#45 did rape her (colloquial term) via the sexual assault (technical liability by the jury).

The jury found he attacked her in their decision of May 2023. FPOTUS#45 sued her and the case was dismissed in August 2023.

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

Awwww….poor baby…She deserved to be mocked…Bringing unprovable claims she got from a Law and order episode is laughable…

This reeks of DNC set up….

She could have done much better with her time travel machine, which she must have had since she had contemporanious communications about the assault in the mid-'90's and the Law & Order episode didn't air until over a decade later.

Me? I'd have time traveled by and invest in Apple and Microsoft stock when the were fledgling company's and the popped back to the future to reap the benefits of the stock increase.

WW

 

[Faun]

I’m sure they have, when someone gets a fair trial. This was not a fair trial, and the judgment was excessive.

By those standards, tara reid could sue Biden in civil court and she would have to do is get 2 friends to testify that he assaulted her…and ban, she’s a rich lady.

That’s exactly what you all are saying.

Does that sound like fairness and justice?

How was this trial not fair?

 

[Faun]

Awwww….poor baby…She deserved to be mocked…Bringing unprovable claims she got from a Law and order episode is laughable…

This reeks of DNC set up….

 

[WorldWatcher]

1st, I said this….”consider a judge telling you that the only answers you can give are “yes, or no” regardless of what the question is….”

That sir is a hypothetical question…

Next…”In September 2023, Engoron issued a summary judgment that Trump and his company had committed fraud for years.”

So, no, there was no trial.

And sir I was addressing the non-hypothetical claims. It wasn't a hypothetical, you very specifically said the Judge took away ** HIS ** right to a fair trial, that the judge took away the most important aspect of a fair trial, by taking away for ** HIM ** to defend, or speak on ** HIS OWN ** behalf…

#1 This thread isn't about the fraud case, it's about the E. Jean Carroll case.

#2 In the Fraud case BOTH the state AND FPOTUS#45 requested summary judgement based on filings with the court. If they didn't want a summary judgement they shouldn't have requested on. Just because they didn't get the judgement they wanted, didn't mean they didn't ask for it.

#3 In the Fraud case there WAS a trial. The summary judgement (as requested by both parties) was issued in September true, but there were 7 claims. The judgement pertained to only of 1 of the 7, the other 6 were addressed at trial. So ya, there was a trial land in actuality the judge downgraded the September order to cancel the Trump Organizations business license entirely to instead allowing the business to continue but with monitoring to ensure the fraudulent and illegal business practices didn't continue.

WW

 

[Faun]

That’s HER saying he raped her…



And that is where the defamation started. From her damaging his reputation by making a claim she had no evidence for.



No, but he can find two friends to testify that “we’ve known trump all our lives and how he really talks in private, and he’s a good upstanding family man who would never do anything like this”, remember, preponderance of evidence? He doesn’t need to PROVE that that is the case, all he has to do is find a sympathetic jury who would BELIEVE he said that.



As my previous post said, all he has to do is use preponderance of evidence that e Jean Carrol lied and that none of his closest friends would actually believe he would do it, and that the previous court was biased. Again, all it takes is for him to find a jury that would believe what trumps friends say is more likely true than not and he can sue her. That’s how flimsy preponderance of evidence is.

Nope. He sexually assaulted her. Her writing about it, therefore, cannot be defamation.

Probably not, I don’t think he has said anything about her lately. But, the appeal will be to a higher court, most likely all the way to the Supreme Court, to have both judgments overturned.

‘We are watching’: E. Jean Carroll threatens to sue Trump for third time over repeated attacks

When asked if Donald Trump's recent remarks against Carroll could trigger a third lawtrsuit, her attorney Crowley stated that “we are watching and listening”.

www.hindustantimes.com

 

[j-mac]

She could have done much better with her time travel machine, which she must have had since she had contemporanious communications about the assault in the mid-'90's and the Law & Order episode didn't air until over a decade later.

Exactly…that’s why it’s ridiculous….And a set up….

Me? I'd have time traveled by and invest in Apple and Microsoft stock when the were fledgling company's and the popped back to the future to reap the benefits of the stock increase.

WW

This woman has claimed rap on 7 different occasions, her team couldn’t even prove that they were both there….What a sham….

Enjoy the precedents y’all are setting…

 

[WorldWatcher]

Exactly…that’s why it’s ridiculous….And a set up….

This woman has claimed rap on 7 different occasions, her team couldn’t even prove that they were both there….What a sham….

Enjoy the precedents y’all are setting…

I'm perfectly fine with criminals being held responsible.

WW

 

[j-mac]

And sir I was addressing the non-hypothetical claims. It wasn't a hypothetical, you very specifically said the Judge took away ** HIS ** right to a fair trial, that the judge took away the most important aspect of a fair trial, by taking away for ** HIM ** to defend, or speak on ** HIS OWN ** behalf…

#1 This thread isn't about the fraud case, it's about the E. Jean Carroll case.

#2 In the Fraud case BOTH the state AND FPOTUS#45 requested summary judgement based on filings with the court. If they didn't want a summary judgement they shouldn't have requested on. Just because they didn't get the judgement they wanted, didn't mean they didn't ask for it.

#3 In the Fraud case there WAS a trial. The summary judgement (as requested by both parties) was issued in September true, but there were 7 claims. The judgement pertained to only of 1 of the 7, the other 6 were addressed at trial. So ya, there was a trial land in actuality the judge downgraded the September order to cancel the Trump Organizations business license entirely to instead allowing the business to continue but with monitoring to ensure the fraudulent and illegal business practices didn't continue.

WW

Look, both cases are being done for one reason … and that is to drain his wealth so he can’t effectively run for president…It ain’t gonna work.

 

[j-mac]

I'm perfectly fine with criminals being held responsible.

WW

How sad are you? I’m for criminals being held responsible too, but it is not a crime to ideologically oppose you.

You want to hold criminals responsible? Start with the border.

 

[j-mac]

 

[Faun]

As my previous post said, all he has to do is use preponderance of evidence that e Jean Carrol lied and that none of his closest friends would actually believe he would do it, and that the previous court was biased. Again, all it takes is for him to find a jury that would believe what trumps friends say is more likely true than not and he can sue her. That’s how flimsy preponderance of evidence is.

LOL

And they would be laughed out of court when the Access Hollywood tape gets played where Trump bragged about assaulting women.

 

[j-mac]

LOL

And they would be laughed out of court when the Access America tape gets played where Trump bragged about assaulting women.

More out of context bullshit from you.

 

[Faun]

 

[Faun]

More out of context bullshit from you.

Nope. That's exactly what would happen.

There's actual audio of him admitting he assaults women...

"You know I'm automatically attracted to beautiful... I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything."​