Trump guilty of battery and defamation of E Jean Carroll

The New York Times

E. Jean Carroll, Who Accused Trump of Rape, Seeks His DNA in Lawsuit​

Ms. Carroll says that President Trump assaulted her in the 1990s, and that she has the dress she was wearing during the incident.

The writer E. Jean Carroll, who has accused Donald J. Trump of raping her in the 1990s and is suing him for defamation, asked on Thursday that he provide a DNA sample to determine whether his genetic material is on a dress she says she had on at the time of the incident.


------------

I do not see why this did not come out at the trial. Trump should have been required to give a DNA sample.
Because it's a civil and not a criminal case, and you can't compel a person to give a DNA sample in a civil case. Since you don't have the sample you can't present it as evidence.

It is one of the disadvantages of a civil case that your options to gather evidence are more limited. On the other hand, both the standard for liability is lower and you can present more stuff as admissible evidence than would be permissible in a criminal case.
 
That’s funny considering your pig Oy grabs women by the genitals
Only if "they let him." That is what he said after all.


Most folks let others pleasure them too, I am not sure how Trump is any different, you care to explain?

:dunno:
 
It still has to go to appeal.

For all we know, he might just have a plan to bankrupt the plaintiff (the woman making this claim,) instead.

Who knows? :dunno:

If, as he is claiming, that she is doing this as a promo for her book. . . ?? Then something is fishy.

If the books sales go through the roof because of this trial, but the lawyers take it all away? meh, what has she gained?
There has to be a matter of law to be appealed.
 
Link? I don’t believe there is any evidence ever that the stain was ever linked back to Trump. Unlike the stain on Monica’s blue dress.
I don't believe I ever said that there is evidence that the stain was linked to Trump. Please read what you're responding to. Specifically the conditional state established by the word 'if'. Let me demonstrate:

If you're not a native speaker of English, I can explain to you how the word "if" works.

You're letting the butthurt from our conversation about Actual Malice make you jump the gun without thinking. Take a breath. You'll do better if you do.
 
How do you square the defense literally having no defense?
Carroll couldn’t define the date or time she was allegedly raped. Who was the defense supposed to call as a witness? There were no witnesses to the alleged rape. If there’s no time frame provided, there is no ability to provide an alibi.

Other than Trump‘s, which was already public, what meaningful testimony could a defense present?
 

Forum List

Back
Top