https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-trump-loses-appeal-of-e-jean-carrolls-us5-million-defamation-verdict/A federal appeals court on Monday upheld a $5-million verdict that E. Jean Carroll won against Donald Trump when a jury found the U.S. president-elect liable for sexually abusing and later defaming the former magazine columnist.A unanimous three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan rejected Trump’s argument that the trial judge made mistakes in letting jurors hear evidence about the Republican’s alleged past sexual misconduct, making the trial and verdict unfair.The court said that evidence, including Trump bragging about his sexual prowess on an “Access Hollywood” video that surfaced during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, established a “repeated, idiosyncratic pattern of conduct” consistent with Carroll’s allegations.“Taking the record as a whole and considering the strength of Ms. Carroll’s case, we are not persuaded that any claimed error or combination of errors in the district court’s evidentiary rulings affected Mr. Trump’s substantial rights,” the court said in an unsigned decision.Lawyers for Trump did not immediately respond to requests for comment. A lawyer for Carroll did not immediately respond to similar requests.The May 2023 verdict stemmed from an incident around 1996 in a Bergdorf Goodman department store dressing room in Manhattan, where Carroll, now 81, said Trump raped her, and an October 2022 Truth Social post where Trump denied Carroll’s claim as a hoax.Though jurors in federal court in Manhattan did not find that Trump, 78, committed rape, they awarded the former Elle magazine advice columnist $2.02 million for sexual assault and $2.98 million for defamation.
. .. A different jury ordered Trump in January to pay Carroll $83.3 million for defaming her and damaging her reputation in June 2019, when he first denied her rape claim.In both denials, Trump said he did not know Carroll, she was “not my type,” and that she fabricated the rape claim to promote her memoir. He is appealing the $83.3 million verdict.Carroll’s cases are continuing despite Trump’s having won a second four-year White House term on Nov. 5.In 1997, in a case involving former President Bill Clinton, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously that sitting presidents have no immunity from civil litigation in federal court over actions predating and unrelated to their official duties as president.Trump’s lawyers argued the $5 million verdict should be thrown out because the trial judge, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan, should not have let jurors hear testimony from two other women who accused Trump of sexual misconduct.
One, businesswoman Jessica Leeds, said Trump groped her on a plane in the late 1970s. The other, former People magazine writer, Natasha Stoynoff, said Trump forcibly kissed her at his Mar-a-Lago estate in 2005.Trump’s lawyers also said the trial judge should not have let jurors watch the 2005 “Access Hollywood” video, where Trump boasted graphically about forcing himself on women.But the court said that in each of these encounters, “Mr. Trump engaged in an ordinary conversation with a woman he barely knew, then abruptly lunged at her in a semi-public place and proceeded to kiss and forcefully touch her without her consent.”It said this was “relevant to show a pattern tending to directly corroborate witness testimony and to confirm that the alleged sexual assault [of Carroll] actually occurred.”
The court also rejected Trump’s claim that Kaplan should have allowed evidence that a prominent Democratic critic, billionaire LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, funded Carroll’s case, saying it had “little probative value.” Carroll is also a Democrat.Kaplan also oversaw the trial that ended with the $83.3 million verdict.
>Trump’s lawyers also said the trial judge should not have let jurors watch the 2005 “Access Hollywood” video, where Trump boasted graphically about forcing himself on women.>The court also rejected Trump’s claim that Kaplan should have allowed evidence that a prominent Democratic critic, billionaire LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman"OMG You can't let the jury at this sexual assault trial hear me brag about sexually assaulting women, that's not fair WAAAAH!" "OMG why didn't you let me slander the plaintiff with irrelevant bullshit, that's not fair WAAAAAH!"Lol, pay up fatty.
>>1371536what a dumb case, it should have been thrown out from the start.> the 2005 “Access Hollywood” video, where Trump boasted graphically about forcing himself on women.fake news, he said that women let rich famous guys grab their pussies.>>1371545And now time for the question that has shut down every other thread on this: What evidence is there that Trump raped Jean Carroll?I look forward to a series of copes from you as you try to justify the fact that there is ZERO evidence he raped her, even though if it actually happened there would have been a lot of corroborating evidence (such as witnesses and security camera footage), and his lack of an alibi on the specific date that it happened.
>>1371548It was compelling enough for multiple juries to rule against him, which is why fatty has to pay up now.And please. No amount of evidence would be good enough for you, MIGA faggot. He could fuck a baby on camera and all you'd feel is jealousy for all parties involved.
>>1371536fundamentally retarded that saying you didn't commit a crime that you weren't convicted of is defamation to the "victim"
Nn
tRump didn't rape her He sexually assaulted her. If the Donald was rapin' me, I'd scream "NO!" and scratch his eyes out. She said,"please, don't do this, and then let him do it.
>>1371549Shut the fuck up tranny retard. She waited 28 years and Trump was gone to have never raped her or sexually assaulted her, not him defending himself is defamation. Manhattan courts using lawfare. Hopefully Trump starts hanging retards like you.
>>1371549>It was compelling enough what, specifically, was compelling though?
>>1371568>seething
So Trump is liable for sexual assault after he raped a woman?
>>1371585Yep. Chump change for the mango Mussolini ..
>>1371585>>1371594I guess you all missed the thread-killer question in >>1371548 so I'll repeat it:What evidence is there that Trump raped Jean Carroll?
>>1371595what evidence is there that you're not a shill
>>1371595Herehttps://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-sd-new-yor/114642632.htmlFeel free to not read it and continue to spam the same question you don't want an answer to. MIGA faggots have been denying reality in order to worship fatty for literally ten years, you're not about to start accepting evidence you don't like now.
>>1371536I'M OUTRAGED!!1 HE OUGHT TO APOLOGIZE!!1
>>1371596>>1371597What evidence is there that Trump raped Jean Carroll?feel free to drop a link that you haven't read because I asked a question you don't have an answer to. Woke NPCs have been denying reality because you were brainwashed from a young age to never question the narrative. You're not about to start caring about evidence now.
>>1371537>In both denials, Trump said he did not know Carroll, she was “not my type,”When Mr. Trump saw Carroll in court, he was asked if he recognized her, and he honestly thought she was his first wife, which sent his lawyer into a panic. This blew apart the "not my type" defense.
>>1371600you get paid to deny reality
>>1371602What evidence is there that Trump raped Jean Carroll?
>>1371600>>1371609https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/19/trump-carroll-judge-rape/
>>1371610>>1371602>>1371597>>1371596>no I can't tell you any evidence that Trump raped Jean CarrollI accept your concession, just like every other thread on this
>>1371575Four more years, tranny. >>1371597Shut the fuck up, retard. Zero fucking evidence and you keep running your mouth. Zero evidence>>1371601>he honestly thought she was his first wife, which sent his lawyer into a panic.You're retarded as fuck>>1371602Cope>>1371610>Washingtonpost>Zero evidence
>>1371613>A judge has now clarified that this is basically a legal distinction without a real-world difference. He says that what the jury found Trump did was in fact rape, as commonly understood.The judge said he raped her, that's good enough for people who aren't cultists. Good luck with your paid shill campaign to confuse boomers with semantics.
>>1371626>it's projecting its sexual fetishes againEwww
>>1371628>cried the pedophile man that thought he was a woman
>>1371651Weird projection bro
>>1371652>Said the pedophile before raping another chil
>>1371654Put your porn away before you post. This is a blue board.
>>1371627As said earlier, they've been doing this for literally a decade. Demanding proof, then ignoring proof presented.They think they're outsmarting or outmaneuvering people, but the reality is people just get tired of their bullshit and give up.Which sums up the American right perfectly. A screaming toddler demanding candy, wearing down everyone around them until they finally relent.
>>1371627>>1371671>since somebody else says it's true, that's all the proof I need because I'm an NPC, and therefore incapable of thinking for myself.okay but what evidence did they use to come to that conclusion?
>>1371671What proof, retard? Literally post it.
>>1371674Testimony from several others confirming Carrol told them what happened back then, testimony from store employees placing the two of them at the scene of the crime, and a pattern of behavior that lines up with what Carrol alleged.It was enough for the jury anon.
>>1371548>fake news, he said that women let rich famous guys grab their pussies.THISThey act like this hasn't always been the case
>>1371610Where is the evidence... this is just a guilty verdict (on that supposed evidence)
>>1371710Also Trump literally didn't put on a defense and between someone saying shit happened under oath and someone who refuses to say shit didn't happen under oath, the case could only really go one way.This isn't even a he said she said. It's just a she said. No idea how anyone could claim Trump didn't do it when his own legal team refused to claim that. Some people are just so stupid and committed to being wrong that they just cling to imagined realities I suppose. Sadly you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themself into.
>>1371600>What evidence is there that Trump raped Jean Carroll?Where is the evidence he didn't? He already lost at trial. You seem to not understand the legal system.
>>1371754>Where is the evidence he didn't?You are a retard of the highest order and need to be thrown out of a helicopter. Losing a rigged trial in Manhattan means nothing. Reminder that Fani Willis is now under investigation for corruption of how she was handling the Trump cases and we'll most likely go to prison
>>1371755>Reminder that Fani Willis is now under investigation for corruption of how she was handling the Trump cases and we'll most likely go to prisonCool cool. One problem: she's in fucking Georgia, not New York.Now will you read the court documents and evidence shown to the jury who found him guilty and stop coping?
>>1371710>28 year old testimony from Trump hating Democrats to a curated Trump hating jury to a corrupt TDS judge.Very credible.shut the fuck up tranny retard. Can't wait to see you cry when the supreme court throws it out
>>1371757>Can't wait to see you cry when the supreme court throws it out>"Well, it'll never go to trial">"Well, she'll never get a trial date">"Well, it'll never hold up to a jury">"Well, it'll never hold up to an appeal">"Well, it'll never hold up a higher court" (You are here)>"Well, it'll never hold up to the supreme court">"Well, it'll never hold up to, uh..."
>>1371755>Fani WillisWow, a sperging Trump faggot who doesn't know the absolute basics of what he's in hysterics about but still thinks everyone else is wrong but him. Never seen that before.You're a credit to your cult, retard.
>>1371762Nice meltdown. I accept your concession, retarded tranny
>>1371765Let me guess, you were pretending to be retarded on purpose when you brought up Fani Willis, right?
>>1371762>BLOODY BENCHODE DO NOT REDEEM
>>1371767All of Trump's cases are going away and everyone prosecuting him will be in prison for corruption. I hope you're the one pretending to be retarded
>>1371769It's hilarious you actually believed him.
>>1371779>I was only pretending to be a corrupt pedophile liberal
>>1371787you're literally a paid shill
>>1371787Trump was a corrupt pedophile liberal before you started believing his sales pitch.
>>1371788No I'm not, but you're not an organic poster. Go back to your tranny grooming discord. >>1371794You wouldn't be crying about him every single day if that were true
>>1371797I wouldn't be crying because he doesn't make me cry. You on the other hand start getting pissy anytime someone dares besmirch his sterling reputation.
>>1371755>Losing a rigged trial in Manhattan means nothingIt means the burden's on Trump and his sycophants to prove he didn't rape her.You seem mad that I've asked a question that you don't have an answer to. NPCs like you have been denying reality because you've been brainwashed to never question the narrative. You're not about to start caring about evidence now.
jean carrol is bat shit crazy accused 6 men in total. https://rumble.com/v4ban0l-newlt-resurrected-video-of-e.-jean-carroll-from-her-90s-show-reveals-a-comp.html
This thread is a great exercise in how NPCs work>>1371549>>1371597>>1371610>>1371627These anons were asked a simple question:What evidence is there that Trump raped Jean Carroll?and their response is>other people said they believed her so it must be truethey fundamentally don't understand the concept of actually looking at evidence or thinking for themselves. All an NPC understands is how to repeat somebody else's opinion, and if that opinion comes from an approved source, then it must be rightthen there are double-down NPCs, like this one:>>1371671>I already showed you proof that other people hold the same opinion I do, you're just being ignorant by ignoring this clear evidencejust doubling down on the fact that, as an NPC, he literally doesn't even understand the concept of evidence or independent thought.then we come to the smartest NPC: >>1371710Unlike other NPCs, this anon actually understands the question. He understands that if Trump was in the store at the same time Carroll was, there must be witnesses who could testify to this.But here's where his NPC brain goes wrong. Instead of asking "Did anybody testify that Trump was there?" he instead assumes "since other people say they believe her, there must be evidence of this!" and so he says there was:>testimony from store employees placing the two of them at the scene of the crimenow is this true? Of course not, there was no such testimony. But he would have to have actually paid attention to the evidence and the facts of the case to know this. And, being an NPC, he did no such thing. Instead he just invented fake evidence to fit the narrative.then this clever NPC:>>1371754>Oh yeah well you can't prove that it DIDN'T happen!never mind that Trump couldn't provide an alibi because Carroll didn't even know what month it happened.and now>>1371812>you care about facts and evidence instead of mindlessly repeating other's opinions?>That makes you the real NPC who denies reality!
>>1372044>and their response is>>other people said they believed her so it must be trueWay to misrepresent what you were told. Not "people", the judge presiding over the case said it was rape. It's hilarious when you act like you know better than the judge.
>>1372045it's hilarious when you act like you're not an NPC when once again your answer to>what is the evidenceis>well other people said there was evidence>but THIS person is a HECKIN EXPERT! The EXPERTS are ALWAYS RIGHT about EVERYTHING!>You're not suggesting an EXPERT could ever be biased are you?>TRUST THE HECKIN EXPERTS THEY ARE BASICALLY GODS!!!!also the judge was just clarifying the findings of the jury you fucking idiot, so your point isn't even true. The judge did not even give an opinion, he simply said what the jury's opinion was. But you didn't know that, because you're an NPC who only reads headlines. And when asked what evidence the jury relied on, your NPC answer is>LOL the JURY said it's TRUE so what more evidence do you want?because you're an NPC and literally don't understand what it means to form an opinion about anything.thank you for further proving the points:1) You are are an NPC who mindlessly repeats other people's opinions because you're not capable of forming your own opinion.2) You are an NPC who isn't capable of reading past a headline.3) You don't bother doing basic research before forming an opinion, because to you, facts are irrelevant and all that matters is having the same opinion as other people.
>>1372052The judge presiding over the case isn't other people. Read the Washington Post article which totally defeats whatever invincible ignorance fallacy argument you're failing at making.
