Can someone explain this? (Trump post)
#8063416
01/29/24 12:29 PM
01/29/24 12:29 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,464 Missouri
ol' dad
OP
trapper
|
OP
trapper
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,464
Missouri
|
From OANN - A verdict has been reached by the jury in E. Jean Carroll’s civil defamation case against former President Donald Trump. The jury has ruled that the 45th president will pay $18.3 million in compensatory damages and an additional $65 million in punitive damages to Carroll for “defamatory public statements” he made about her in 2019.
The jury of seven men and two women came to the decision in less than three hours.
In May, a jury found the former president liable for battery in a civil trial brought forth by writer E. Jean Carroll. Carroll claimed that Trump had previously raped and assaulted her back in the 1990’s. She also claimed that Trump defamed her when she went public with the accusation in 2019.
The jury was tasked with determining whether or not the Republican presidential front-runner forcibly assaulted and defamed Carroll. They ultimately found Trump liable for defamation and battery.
However, they also found him innocent of the rape accusation.
Carroll was awarded $5 million in damages due to the alleged battery. Trump must pay this amount in addition to the $83.3 million. Not meant to be a political post, but genuinely curious how one is found innocent of rape but guilty of defamation by the person who is accusing him of rape? I don't know of any other cases to cite. Just curious, on the chance that someone accuses me of stealing a muskrat from their set, I'd hate to call them a name and it end up costing me my life savings. ol' dad
|
|
|
Re: Can someone explain this? (Trump post)
[Re: ol' dad]
#8063423
01/29/24 12:35 PM
01/29/24 12:35 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 20,351 The Hill Country of Texas
Leftlane
"HOSS"
|
"HOSS"
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 20,351
The Hill Country of Texas
|
Remember the phrase rules for thee but not for me and the news will make more sense. Also- we are living in strange times. I quit the news 4 yrs ago this month and I don't miss it a bit.
“What’s good for me may not be good for the weak minded.” Captain Gus McCrae- Texas Rangers
|
|
|
Re: Can someone explain this? (Trump post)
[Re: Leftlane]
#8063428
01/29/24 12:43 PM
01/29/24 12:43 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2022
Posts: 4,586 illinois
jalstat
trapper
|
trapper
Joined: Dec 2022
Posts: 4,586
illinois
|
Remember the phrase rules for thee but not for me and the news will make more sense. Also- we are living in strange times. I quit the news 4 yrs ago this month and I don't miss it a bit. Yep
|
|
|
Re: Can someone explain this? (Trump post)
[Re: ol' dad]
#8063436
01/29/24 12:50 PM
01/29/24 12:50 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 4,985 rogers city mi.
jeff karsten
trapper
|
trapper
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 4,985
rogers city mi.
|
Apparently there was no case in the (90)s or is the coverup gonna be the next big case
olden tyred
|
|
|
Re: Can someone explain this? (Trump post)
[Re: ol' dad]
#8063443
01/29/24 12:58 PM
01/29/24 12:58 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,028 MD
DaveP
trapper
|
trapper
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,028
MD
|
Statue of limitations had already run out, so NY gave a year to file, then closed it again, obviously tailoring the tempororary law change to her case. If that isn't targeted lawfare, what is? I'm sure our resident lawyers will tell us!
She couldn't say what month, or even what year exactly, the alleged incident took.place. Claims she saved the dress she was wearing at the time, but that dress wasnt manufactured until years later.
"In 2019, Carroll came forward with a rape claim against Trump in her then forthcoming book, What Do We Need Men For? A Modest Proposal, an excerpt of which ran that June in New York magazine. Trump responded to Carroll’s claim – that he sexually assaulted her in a high-end department store dressing room around early 1996 – by saying she was a dishonest political operative.
Carroll sued him for defamation, as the statute of limitations barred her from suing over the assault. When a New York law in 2022 granted accusers a one-year window to sue their abusers for incidents outside the civil statute of limitations, Carroll commenced another civil action – this time for the assault and his defamatory statements about her post-presidency."
Last edited by DaveP; 01/29/24 01:00 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Can someone explain this? (Trump post)
[Re: ol' dad]
#8063474
01/29/24 01:37 PM
01/29/24 01:37 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 34,989 Central, SD
Law Dog
trapper
|
trapper
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 34,989
Central, SD
|
If you can’t jail him then plan B is to bankrupt him they will try to destroy him one way or another hook or crook.
Was born in a Big City Will die in the Country OK with that!
Jerry Herbst
|
|
|
Re: Can someone explain this? (Trump post)
[Re: jbyrd63]
#8063477
01/29/24 01:41 PM
01/29/24 01:41 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 20,351 The Hill Country of Texas
Leftlane
"HOSS"
|
"HOSS"
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 20,351
The Hill Country of Texas
|
He was guilty of saying he didn't do it . Said she was lying. THAT IS normal behavior. SO shouldn't monica Lewinsky sue bill Clinton. He said he didn't do her but he did...... As if the facts matter LOL. Facts matter the least now Uncle of Savell!
“What’s good for me may not be good for the weak minded.” Captain Gus McCrae- Texas Rangers
|
|
|
Re: Can someone explain this? (Trump post)
[Re: ol' dad]
#8063479
01/29/24 01:41 PM
01/29/24 01:41 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 45,607 james bay frontierOnt.
Boco
trapper
|
trapper
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 45,607
james bay frontierOnt.
|
James could likely explain it better but there is a different bar applied to a criminal case and a civil one. One is beyond reasonable doubt the other is preponderance of evidence. Just because one cannot prove something beyond reasonable doubt does not mean it did not happen. Still guilty in the civil court by an overwhelming preponderance of evidence.The bar is not as high in the civil court.
Same thing ocurred with OJ.
Forget that fear of gravity-get a little savagery in your life.
|
|
|
Re: Can someone explain this? (Trump post)
[Re: Boco]
#8063495
01/29/24 01:56 PM
01/29/24 01:56 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,464 Missouri
ol' dad
OP
trapper
|
OP
trapper
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,464
Missouri
|
James could likely explain it better but there is a different bar applied to a criminal case and a civil one. One is beyond reasonable doubt the other is preponderance of evidence. Just because one cannot prove something beyond reasonable doubt does not mean it did not happen. Still guilty in the civil court by an overwhelming preponderance of evidence.The bar is not as high in the civil court.
Same thing ocurred with OJ. So what if the person is truly innocent? Do they not have a right to deny the allegations without fear of punishment by a civil court? How is one supposed to clear their name? ol dad
|
|
|
Re: Can someone explain this? (Trump post)
[Re: ol' dad]
#8063499
01/29/24 01:58 PM
01/29/24 01:58 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 45,607 james bay frontierOnt.
Boco
trapper
|
trapper
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 45,607
james bay frontierOnt.
|
Dont ask me those are your laws.
Not sure you can be pardoned when you lose a civil suit.
Probably an appeal.
Last edited by Boco; 01/29/24 02:01 PM.
Forget that fear of gravity-get a little savagery in your life.
|
|
|
Re: Can someone explain this? (Trump post)
[Re: ol' dad]
#8063516
01/29/24 02:15 PM
01/29/24 02:15 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,249 Co.-Wy. part time AK.
wy.wolfer
trapper
|
trapper
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,249
Co.-Wy. part time AK.
|
From OANN - A verdict has been reached by the jury in E. Jean Carroll’s civil defamation case against former President Donald Trump. The jury has ruled that the 45th president will pay $18.3 million in compensatory damages and an additional $65 million in punitive damages to Carroll for “defamatory public statements” he made about her in 2019.
The jury of seven men and two women came to the decision in less than three hours.
In May, a jury found the former president liable for battery in a civil trial brought forth by writer E. Jean Carroll. Carroll claimed that Trump had previously raped and assaulted her back in the 1990’s. She also claimed that Trump defamed her when she went public with the accusation in 2019.
The jury was tasked with determining whether or not the Republican presidential front-runner forcibly assaulted and defamed Carroll. They ultimately found Trump liable for defamation and battery.
However, they also found him innocent of the rape accusation.
Carroll was awarded $5 million in damages due to the alleged battery. Trump must pay this amount in addition to the $83.3 million. Not meant to be a political post, but genuinely curious how one is found innocent of rape but guilty of defamation by the person who is accusing him of rape? I don't know of any other cases to cite. Just curious, on the chance that someone accuses me of stealing a muskrat from their set, I'd hate to call them a name and it end up costing me my life savings. ol' dad One word "POLITICS" Trump's Lawyer was not allowed to bring up a finding that every juror was a registered Democrat. Imagine that in NYC. And why did she wait 2-1/2 decades to bring up this? They did the same exact thing to Kavanaugh. This seems to be the new political attack point of the Democrat Party.
Last edited by wy.wolfer; 01/29/24 02:20 PM.
|
|
|
|
|