E J Carroll Already Counting Her Money......But She Won't See A Penny Of It

[Robert W]

I know man, attacking a woman jamming your fingers into her ***** just ain't rape.

WW

Has New York's justice system got so corrupt that they do not require evidence of a crime? Looks a lot like what is happening to innocent people in DC to me. I need to look up Rape in that state.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Has New York's justice system got so corrupt that they do not require evidence of a crime? Looks a lot like what is happening to innocent people in DC to me. I need to look up Rape in that state.

It appears you need to look up a LOT of stuff about this.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Has New York's justice system got so corrupt that they do not require evidence of a crime? Looks a lot like what is happening to innocent people in DC to me. I need to look up Rape in that state.

#1 There was evidence.

#2 It was a civil case not a criminal one.

#3 New York changed the law after the incident. It used to be a requirement that the penis be inserted into the vagina to be considered rape. Without that it was sexual assault.

WW

 

[Robert W]

#1 There was evidence.

#2 It was a civil case not a criminal one.

#3 New York changed the law after the incident. It used to be a requirement that the penis be inserted into the vagina to be considered rape. Without that it was sexual assault.

WW

What was the evidence? Strange how the law was changed and then it went back to it's former state.

 

[WorldWatcher]

What was the evidence?

Testimony.

Strange how the law was changed and then it went back to it's former state.

It was changed from penis insertion to forcible entry into the vagina be the penis, other digits, or foreign objects.

I don't believe it was changed back. But that doesn't matter anyway as the law was evaluated based on the time of the attack which was the mid-90's. That's why the jury didn't find he committed "rape" (technical under the law) but did commit sexual assault.

WW

 

[two_iron]

That fossilized **** mutt can't even remember what year her rape fantasy occurred. Sometime in the 90's? Is that close enough?

This diseased **** hole makes smollett and ballsy-ford look credible.

When it's overturned there should be censures and prison time for all involved in the hoax.

 

[Robert W]

Testimony.

View attachment 896222



It was changed from penis insertion to forcible entry into the vagina be the penis, other digits, or foreign objects.

I don't believe it was changed back. But that doesn't matter anyway as the law was evaluated based on the time of the attack which was the mid-90's. That's why the jury didn't find he committed "rape" (technical under the law) but did commit sexual assault.

WW

Present the actual court evidence for us to look over.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Present the actual court evidence for us to look over.

Address your request to:

District Judge Hon. Lewis A. Kaplan
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
United States Courthouse
500 Pearl St.
New York, NY 10007-1312
.
.
.
The evidence was presented as testimony, you will need to ask his clerk for a copy of the court transcripts which will reflect what the jury based their decision on.

Just because you were not in the courtroom, does not mean testimony (which is evidence) was not presented.

WW

 

[Robert W]

Address your request to:

District Judge Hon. Lewis A. Kaplan
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
United States Courthouse
500 Pearl St.
New York, NY 10007-1312
.
.
.
The evidence was presented as testimony, you will need to ask his clerk for a copy of the court transcripts which will reflect what the jury based their decision on.

Just because you were not in the courtroom, does not mean testimony (which is evidence) was not presented.

WW

Unless a ghost was in the dressing room, who testified for the woman, all I know about is he said vs she said. She is not credible as I understand what she told the court. I am shocked a Jury said Trump did it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Unless a ghost was in the dressing room, who testified for the woman, all I know about is he said vs she said.

Because you aren't paying attention. It was he said, many people said.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Unless a ghost was in the dressing room, who testified for the woman, all I know about is he said vs she said. She is not credible as I understand what she told the court. I am shocked a Jury said Trump did it.

You know what you (or I) believe matters in the real world.

She was found more credible than FPOTUS#45 by the jury. The ones that matter.

WW

 

[Robert W]

You know what you (or I) believe matters in the real world.

She was found more credible than FPOTUS#45 by the jury. The ones that matter.

WW

They will be overturned for certain.

 

[WorldWatcher]

They will be overturned for certain.

Not for certain.

Depends on the appeal and reasons cited to challenge the verdict.

Overturned? Unlikely.

The amount reduced? Possibily from the $80M range to $60M. The appeals court will probably not reduce the $18M in compensatory damages. They may shave some off the punitive damages.

But then of course with FPOTUS#45 antics during the second trial they may feel the full amount is justified.

WW

 

[Robert W]

Not for certain.

Depends on the appeal and reasons cited to challenge the verdict.

Overturned? Unlikely.

The amount reduced? Possibily from the $80M range to $60M. The appeals court will probably not reduce the $18M in compensatory damages. They may shave some off the punitive damages.

But then of course with FPOTUS#45 antics during the second trial they may feel the full amount is justified.

WW

I hope you understand, assuming you are a man, that this establishes precedent that means any woman you had sex with can now charge you and win her case.

 

[WorldWatcher]

I hope you understand, assuming you are a man, that this establishes precedent that means any woman you had sex with can now charge you and win her case.

"Had sex with" isn't the claim.

Sexually attacked and grabbed her ***** and inserted - at a minimum - his finger is.

Sexually attacking women has been against the law for - oh I don't know - hundreds of years.

Maybe if he had actually presented a defense case during the Trial of Fact instead of blowing it off the jury would have believed him.

WW

 

[Robert W]

"Had sex with" isn't the claim.

Sexually attacked and grabbed her ***** and inserted - at a minimum - his finger is.

Sexually attacking women has been against the law for - oh I don't know - hundreds of years.

Maybe if he had actually presented a defense case during the Trial of Fact instead of blowing it off the jury would have believed him.

WW

You can boost your case if you use actual courtroom testimony. Frankly the news is not a good place to find such testimony.

I would virtually expect you know women who could make that same claim about you.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I hope you understand, assuming you are a man, that this establishes precedent that means any woman you had sex with can now charge you and win her case.

A bizarre lie.

You have run out of talking points. And the cult always defaults to their Alamo of hilariously insane fear mongering.

 

[WorldWatcher]

You can boost your case if you use actual courtroom testimony. Frankly the news is not a good place to find such testimony.

Her testimony and the testimony of those she told at the time are wiggly reported. Sorry you haven’t kept up.

I would virtually expect you know women who could make that same claim about you.

Let me think about it.

Nope, never conned a woman in a dressing room then attempted to rape her or grab her *****.

I’m fine thanks.

WW