Trump guilty of battery and defamation of E Jean Carroll

[Skylar]

That wasn’t the actual verdict.

Says you. The jury had a different take:

Asked on its verdict sheet whether Carroll, 79, had proven “by a preponderance of the evidence” that “Mr. Trump raped Ms. Carroll,” the nine-person jury checked the box that said “no.” Asked whether Carroll had proven “by a preponderance of the evidence” that “Mr. Trump sexually abused Ms. Carroll,” the jury checked the box that said “yes.” Both allegations were elements of Carroll’s battery claim.

Smiling....maybe you've got a random wordpress blog post backed by nothing that magically changes the verdict?

 

[Dante Reawakened]

Many of us see through your reliance on bullagit. This thread is largely about liberals reliance on lies and deception and fiction. Like your post.

 

[Dante Reawakened]

In all fairness...

not one of your strong suits here

 

[HaShev]

Life's a bitch. Get a fucking helmet.

You just made fun of the OP, the Left, the media, so does this means you'll be paying 5million to Trump or just me who's relatives were from South Africa and I identify as a person who qualifies for California hand outs.

 

[Dante Reawakened]

False. But to call you a liar is to be redundant. Trump didn’t rape anybody and wasn’t convicted of rape and wasn’t even found liable for rape, you lying twat rash.

I do. And I speak it. It’s called honesty. Therefore you don’t recognize it.


I leave cock sucking to you pussy libtards.

Nope. Unlike you, I have accuracy on my side. You’ve got your reliance on lies.

Every time you post, you reconfirm it.

 

[Skylar]

It doesn’t “prove” any such thing. It is only a civil trial determination. And it’s unlikely, I believe, to remain in effect after the appellate process.

The jury says otherwise.

Asked on its verdict sheet whether Carroll, 79, had proven “by a preponderance of the evidence” that “Mr. Trump raped Ms. Carroll,” the nine-person jury checked the box that said “no.” Asked whether Carroll had proven “by a preponderance of the evidence” that “Mr. Trump sexually abused Ms. Carroll,” the jury checked the box that said “yes.” Both allegations were elements of Carroll’s battery claim.


Its adorable that you think your personal opinion overrides a jury's verdict.

There are 5 million reasons that prove you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Mac-7]

Trump sexually abused writer E. Jean Carroll, must pay her $5 million, jury says

Donald Trump must pay $5 million in damages for sexually abusing magazine writer E. Jean Carroll in the 1990s and then defaming her by branding her a liar, a jury decided on Tuesday.

www.reuters.com

Makes ya proud, MAGA?

It makes me puke that liberals can abuse the law that easily

 

[Dante Reawakened]

You keep using that false phrase. Is it because you’re a retard or just too deep in your own lies?

That’s all I’ve done.

Too bad the jury didn’t.


It doesn’t “prove” any such thing. It is only a civil trial determination. And it’s unlikely, I believe, to remain in effect after the appellate process.


You don’t even admit what the NY Slimes has reported. You (to your credit) at least acknowledge the difference between rape and sexual abuse. You seem to grasp the difference between a civil case verdict of liability and a criminal case conviction. But you then derive lessons from it that the facts and the evidence and the law don’t support.

good gawd, who could ever make sense out of your pathetic attempts at posting.

 

[BackAgain]

The jury says otherwise.

Asked on its verdict sheet whether Carroll, 79, had proven “by a preponderance of the evidence” that “Mr. Trump raped Ms. Carroll,” the nine-person jury checked the box that said “no.” Asked whether Carroll had proven “by a preponderance of the evidence” that “Mr. Trump sexually abused Ms. Carroll,” the jury checked the box that said “yes.” Both allegations were elements of Carroll’s battery claim.


Its adorable that you think your personal opinion overrides a jury's verdict.

There are 5 million reasons that prove you don't know what you're talking about.

Repeating what we already know about the civil jury verdict doesn’t amount to a counter argument, kid.

 

[Dante Reawakened]

The Cult thinks this is bad?

Do they even have a clue what is in the pipeline, that is coming down soon?

 

[Dante Reawakened]

Repeating what we already know about the civil jury verdict doesn’t amount to a counter argument, kid.

OJ Simpson is on line #1

 

[HaShev]

not one of your strong suits here

You have not refuted anything, why wait till this post to complain, tell us what part of tringv to oust a duly elected president and defame him has been fair? It's called a coup aka treason, how is the lefts failure to abide by the 2016 election fair?
Trump won, why try to reverse it oh judge of whatcs fair...

 

[BackAgain]

good gawd, who could ever make sense out of your pathetic attempts at posting.

You couldn’t make cents out of a pile of pennies.

I realize that — like reality itself — most of these posts sa far over your little pinhead, but you can keep plugging, zippy.

 

[Dante Reawakened]

Harvey Weinstein, Jeffrey Epstein, and Now Donald Trump

jury said: "A Manhattan jury has found that Trump sexually abused and defamed E. Jean Carroll, and awarded $5 million in damages." -- by lying about the rape.


He's a fucking rapist. That is what the jury said -- in a civil trial, just like a jury in a civil trial said OJ Simpson murdered his wife.


What evidence was there in the civil trial that convicted OJ Simpson of murdering his Wife and Ron Goldman?

Members who reacted to message #779

www.usmessageboard.com

What is wrong here? Untrue? Fake? False?

 

[BackAgain]

OJ Simpson is on line #1

He wants to ask you out on a date, zippy.

 

[BackAgain]

Members who reacted to message #779

www.usmessageboard.com

What is wrong here? Untrue? Fake? False?

Your lack of coherency.

 

[Dante Reawakened]

You couldn’t make cents out of a pile of pennies.

I realize that — like reality itself — most of these posts sa far over your little pinhead, but you can keep plugging, zippy.

 

[Dante Reawakened]

Your lack of coherency.

coherent enough for you little Queenie?

 

[Skylar]

Repeating what we already know about the civil jury verdict doesn’t amount to a counter argument, kid.

Repeating the jury verdict explicitly contradicting you most definitely is a counter argument, sweetie.


Asked on its verdict sheet whether Carroll, 79, had proven “by a preponderance of the evidence” that “Mr. Trump raped Ms. Carroll,” the nine-person jury checked the box that said “no.” Asked whether Carroll had proven “by a preponderance of the evidence” that “Mr. Trump sexually abused Ms. Carroll,” the jury checked the box that said “yes.” Both allegations were elements of Carroll’s battery claim.


I've got the actual jury verdict that the preponderance of the evidence proved that Trump sexually abused and defamed Caroll on one hand.

....and your impotent denial on the other.

As always, our sources are not equal.

 

[Leo123]

Says you. The jury had a different take:

Asked on its verdict sheet whether Carroll, 79, had proven “by a preponderance of the evidence” that “Mr. Trump raped Ms. Carroll,” the nine-person jury checked the box that said “no.” Asked whether Carroll had proven “by a preponderance of the evidence” that “Mr. Trump sexually abused Ms. Carroll,” the jury checked the box that said “yes.” Both allegations were elements of Carroll’s battery claim.

Smiling....maybe you've got a random wordpress blog post backed by nothing that magically changes the verdict?

Show the checked box. The verdict was for battery which can include just a touch. You got sucked in again or are now just repeating lies.