$83.3 million reasons why?

[jaF0]

Because a judge ruled a summary judgement on the 2019 defamation lawsuit.

No he wasn’t. It was a mandated bench trial. Dummy.

"The trial began on April 25, 2023, in federal court at the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. That day, the judge selected a jury of six men and three women, anonymous even to the judge, and it was arranged that the jury would be transported by U.S. Marshals from an underground garage throughout the trial."

"The jury reached a unanimous decision on May 9, after deliberating for less than three hours. Considering the preponderance of the evidence, the jury delivered a verdict that first stated that Carroll had not proven that Trump raped her, and next stated that Carroll did prove that Trump had sexually abused her, and also stated that Trump defamed Carroll with false statements made with actual malice "




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._Je...defamation_lawsuit_(November_2019–March_2023)

 

[KeithD]

No he wasn’t. It was a mandated bench trial. Dummy.

Wrong. You're so owned by the odious Trump that you have no idea what is truth and what isn't anymore.

 

[jaF0]

A summary judgment is a judgment entered by a court for one party and against another party without a full trial.

You're talking about the New York state fraud case against the corporation, not this case.

 

[ll74]

A summary judgment is a judgment entered by a court for one party and against another party without a full trial.

But please, continue to tell me to “read more”

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/summary_judgment

Ok ..read more.

The judge made a ruling. Sorry.

 

[Bebode]

"The trial began on April 25, 2023, in federal court at the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. That day, the judge selected a jury of six men and three women, anonymous even to the judge, and it was arranged that the jury would be transported by U.S. Marshals from an underground garage throughout the trial."

"The jury reached a unanimous decision on May 9, after deliberating for less than three hours. Considering the preponderance of the evidence, the jury delivered a verdict that first stated that Carroll had not proven that Trump raped her, and next stated that Carroll did prove that Trump had sexually abused her, and also stated that Trump defamed Carroll with false statements made with actual malice "




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._Jean_Carroll_v._Donald_J._Trump#Original_defamation_lawsuit_(November_2019–March_2023)

That was for the “rape” case

 

[Sparky74]

Wrong. You're so owned by the odious Trump that you have no idea what is truth and what isn't anymore.

Well Said Keith

 

[jaF0]

That was for the “rape” case

This defamation case is an extension of that.

 

[Bebode]

This trial that just concluded that DID have a jury, was not about whether he did or didn’t “defame” her, it was about how much money it would cost him. The ruling of a summary judgement based on the outcome of the previous trial, determined that he had defamed her. There was no trial for that a judge decided. That is why at this trial the jury was not allowed to see certain evidence because trumps “guilt” had already been established because of the summary judgement.

 

[Sparky74]

This defamation case is an extension of that.

Well Said ja, follow a lot of DT Stuff here in the UK as we get Court TV on Sky.

 

[jaF0]

"On September 6, 2023, Kaplan issued a partial summary judgment in favor of Carroll, ruling that Trump was liable for defaming Carroll via statements he made in 2019. Kaplan ruled that the jury's verdict in Carroll II "plainly established that Mr. Trump's 2019 statements were false", with the "substantive content" of Trump's defamatory 2022 statement being "identical to the substantive content" of Trump's 2019 statements; in both statements, Trump accused Carroll of "concocting a sexual assault allegation for improper purposes"; since "the jury considered and decided issues that are common to both cases" and concluded that "the sexual assault occurred", this indicated that "Carroll did not lie about it". As a result, the 2024 trial was expected to primarily focus on determining the amount of additional damages Trump will owe Carroll."


Since the case had already been tried, there was no need for another based on identical facts.

 

[Bebode]

This defamation case is an extension of that.

No -it is a separate case.

 

[Sparky74]

No -it is a separate case.

You do talk utter nonsense but your Threads are hilarious to read.

 

[cdstefi]

I love that so far it's consistently been women who have held Trump accountable for his big filthy misogynistic mouth.

When he gets locked up, a man will punch him in that big mouth for his other deplorable traits.

Very fucking hard, let's hope.

 

[jaF0]

No -it is a separate case.

It's a continuous chain because your Stupid Otange God can't keep his stupid fat mouth shut. I expect to see it continue further because he's still spewing the same filth that got him into it to begin with.

 

[Bebode]

It's a continuous chain because your Stupid Otange God can't keep his stupid fat mouth shut. I expect to see it continue further because he's still spewing the same filth that got him into it to begin with.

Trump derangement syndrome is strong with this one

 

[Rightguide]

An outrageous award from a corrupt court. Let's see what happens on appeal.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

An outrageous award from a corrupt court. Let's see what happens on appeal.

Donald Trump has to put up all the money BEFORE he can appeal. It’s held by the state until the appeal finishes.

 

[Lazaran]

Donald Trump has to put up all the money BEFORE he can appeal. It’s held by the state until the appeal finishes.

From what I understand, that is what ALL future courts / judges dealing with the corrupt orange traitor’s litigious delaying maneuvers are going to do.

So if the Leticia James fraud case results in a $250 million penalty, the corrupt orange traitor will have to pony up $250 million to appeal.

And if the NEXT defamation case involving E. Jean Carroll results in a $250 million penalty, the corrupt orange traitor will have to pony up another $250 million to appeal.

At some point, the corrupt orange traitor is going to break.

I believe we are already seeing the cracks in the MAGAt’s orange idol beginning to show.

The muttering in court and the sudden angry exit from the courtroom are clear indicators that “"Teflon Don” doesn’t like all the charges / verdicts sticking.

That’s too bad…

 

[jomar]

Dershowitz: the Trump-Carroll verdict is a Rorschach test​

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_80,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fe4e225f9-7a41-4513-bd6a-92b8b69d011e_456x455.jpeg
ALAN DERSHOWITZ
MAY 10, 2023


The mixed verdict delivered by the jury in the Donald Trump civil rape case will be interpreted differently by those who support and oppose the former president.
On the main count that Trump raped E. Jean Carroll, the nine-person jury unanimously found that he did not. The plaintiff could not even satisfy its low burden of proof, namely proof beyond a preponderance of the evidence. In so finding, the jury apparently disbelieved at least part of the plaintiff’s testimony. She was very specific about being raped, not merely sexually abused or molested, as the jury did find.
It’s a strange verdict. The jury seems to have believed some of her testimony; namely that she had an encounter with Trump at Bergdorf Goodman in the mid-1990s, which Trump has adamantly denied, both in depositions and in public statements. He did not appear at trial either to testify or to sit in the courtroom, but his lawyer presented his denials to the jury.
It is also hard to reconcile the jury’s finding that he did not rape her with its finding that he maliciously defamed her by essentially saying that he did not rape her.
Accordingly, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to which this case will be appealed, will have its work cut out for it. There will be other substantial issues as well on appeal. They include the extension of the statute of limitations, after it had already expired, which allowed the plaintiff to bring a quarter-century-old case. This may well constitute denial of due process as guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. Other appellate issues will include the judge’s strange ruling that the names of the jurors will remain anonymous even to the lawyers, thus denying them the ability to research them and determine whether any hidden biases may have existed. This may violate the defendant’s constitutional right to trial by jury guaranteed by the Seventh Amendment.

^^^^^^^

Additional appellate issues will include the judge’s decision to admit some evidence presented by the plaintiff, such as the infamous Access Hollywood tape, in which Trump says that women permit celebrities to touch their private parts, as well as the testimony of other women who were deemed to corroborate the plaintiff’s testimony. The judge also excluded some evidence that the defendant sought to admit.

All in all, if the appellant in this case had a name other than Donald Trump, there is a good likelihood that the entire verdict might be reversed. But almost nobody, whether they be a judge or a juror, doesn’t have strong views about the former president. Whether these views impact judicial decisions is a question about which reasonable people might disagree.

The impact of this decision on Trump’s political aspirations is also uncertain. The mixed verdict is something of a Rorschach test. Supporters of Trump will point to the jury’s verdict that he did not commit rape. Opponents of Trump will point to the verdicts against him on the other charges, as well as the $5 million that Trump will be obliged to pay her unless he wins the appeal.

The verdict is unlikely to hurt Trump’s chances of securing the Republican nomination, since his base is unlikely to be influenced negatively — and that base is probably large enough to secure the nomination. But it may well impact independent voters in the general election. President Biden’s sinking polls suggest that if the candidates in November 2024 are Trump and Biden, this will be an election of negatives: who do you dislike least?

So none of that answers the evidence admission question.

And I think Dershowitz has his thumb on the scale. My memory is that the jury did not unanimously find trump didn’t rape her, rather that she wasn’t sure if it was his dick or finger in her.

 

[icanhelp1]

So none of that answers the evidence admission question.

And I think Dershowitz has his thumb on the scale. My memory is that the jury did not unanimously find trump didn’t rape her, rather that she wasn’t sure if it was his dick or finger in her.

She couldn’t confirm what year. She’s a nut case, even her friend called her a nutcase in a word.

 

[coati]

She couldn’t confirm what year. She’s a nut case, even her friend called her a nutcase in a word.

Keep on whining, Deplorables! Your cult leader is just seeing the first of his woes.

 

[coati]

An outrageous award from a corrupt court. Let's see what happens on appeal.

Yeah, let's see. You MAGAts tend to learn the hard way.

 

[dmallord]

Evidence that supported Trump's defense was not not allowed in court. 83 million is laughable and will be overturned in a court of appeal.

It was not admitted for a reason. It was not allowed because it did not relate to the current case. It might have been in the first one, but Trump's lawyers missed the deadlines for submission in that case. This was not some activist judge coming down on Trump's team. It was a procedural matter. Trump's neophyte lawyer repeatedly tried to introduce such non-admissible evidence about the first trial. The judge finally told her she was borderline being slapped with a fine and to sit herself down. [Goes to show she needs some more experience, one would expect.] The last case, 83.3m, was to determine payment for defamation, not whether Trump was guilty in the first case. That ship sailed in the last case. He lost. Trump was already guilty of a sexual crime before he got to this level. This case was just about his continued lying about the verdict and defamation of Carroll after being directed to desist from continuing his repetitive lying.

A number of former district attorneys noted today that the number is only a 3x ratio punitive damage matter. Apparently, this is a low amount by that standard and within the parameters that upper courts routinely run as a good call. According to those experts, upper courts sometimes reduce the amount once the punitive damages exceed a 6x ratio. Those same experts noted that nothing in the proceedings stood out as potential total dismissal for cause. Their experiences and assessments point to the 83.3m sailing through any appeal judge as a loss for Trump.

My best guess is Teflon Don isn't so slick anymore. His appearance at the rally tonight was evident that the sting of 83.3 million chapped his ass. He kept quiet for a change.

 

[stxjimmy]

EXACTLY!!!

Guilty till proven guilty, More Lititia James Fani Willis style lawfare.

I read somewhere that NY actually changed the laws governing statutes of limitations just so they could try this case. NY is corrupt to the core.

Try reading something honest.

 

[zipman]

Donald Trump has to put up all the money BEFORE he can appeal. It’s held by the state until the appeal finishes.

And Trump is cash poor. It's all tied up in properties.

And he also has the fraud trial to cover if he loses.