Why the rape case against Trump will end up thrown into the trash

[WorldWatcher]

Again, the fact that you persist in misrepresenting the black and white on the verdict says it all.

What do you think the sexual abuse being checked "YES" and the $2,000,000 in damages was for?

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

Thank you for showing you really can be polite. I appreciate it. I said clearly i do not like Trump. I do like the job he did. But him as a person makes me angry.

I am speaking of the case where the award was 83 million dollars. That is where he tried to mount a defense and was denied.
You are correct that the same judge was in charge both times. And he ruled that due to case #1, case #2 was where Trump had no defense.

But he based case #1 only on stale dated testimony. It was testimony alleged to happen around 30 years back. I believe the next courts will agree that is far too long in the past and will overturn Kaplans rulings here.

Let me try to be a bit more personal. Would you want my defense of you were you the person on trial or would you want Kaplan to rule against you? If you were charged with rape, but the claim was reduced to assault, and the witnesses were talking of events dating back a third of a century, would you want others to believe the women were right to go against you or you were right to rely on them not using ancient testimony?

I am speaking of the case where the award was 83 million dollars. That is where he tried to mount a defense and was denied.

This is where you are incorrect.

He was fully allowed to present a defense within the scope of the trial. The second trial was NOT a liability trial, that decision was made by the previous jury. That was NOT a question before the jury to decide if he did or did not attack Ms. Carroll, the second jury was SOLELY to determine the amount of damages to award.

Because he blew off the Trial of Fact and didn't like the outcome does not mean he gets to relitigate liability in the damages trial.

WW

 

[tahuyaman]

Any half wit would have understood. You don't.

If you had half a wit you’d be a half wit. Your gibberish is silly.

 

[Rawley]

What do you think the sexual abuse being checked "YES" and the $2,000,000 in damages was for?

WW

At least you finally read the verdict form. Baby steps.

 

[Care4all]

No, they determined that he did not stick his dick in her vagina. They didn't believe her - aka they thought she was lying.

Nope. Not sure why you guys are obsessed with her vagina.

She never testified he did....she testified she didn't know if it was a finger or dick in the struggle or something of the sort, is my understanding. You can likely find it in the trial transcripts....that's why the jury had the choice...if either box was checked, rape or sexual assault, then the jury could go on with the rest of the questions on the form.

 

[toobfreak]

Nope. Produce it. Have done it before...nothing. No evidence ever came up. You need to attach yourself to it. You need to provide a link. I’ve heard this song and dance before and never have you or anyone else produced it. Go for it ! Don’t be a bullshitter. Prove those 60 court cases wrong.

None of those 60 court cases (except a couple) actually looked at and adjudicated the evidence. They dismissed the cases on technical grounds refusing to try them. I remember one case was dismissed because Trump was required to have filed the case BEFORE the election, before there even was a case! The couple that actually WERE adjudicated, found in favor of Trump.

 

[toobfreak]

Hilarious. You’re delusional.

Yeah, I know. Asking you to actually follow threads is like asking a chicken today's headlines.

 

[Rawley]

She never testified he did....she testified she didn't know if it was a finger or dick in the struggle or something of the sort, is my understanding.

You follow too much Trump hate media. WW posted it above. “Ms. Carroll testified Mr Trump assaulter her … forcibly penetrating her vagina … with his penis.”

You can likely find it in the trial transcripts....that's why the jury had the choice...if either box was checked, rape or sexual assault, then the jury could go on with the rest of the questions on the form.

It was not sexual assault. It was "sexual abuse." Which under NY law can be grabbing her tush.

 

[WorldWatcher]

At least you finally read the verdict form. Baby steps.

Yes, I've said repeatedly that the jury found FPOTUS#45 sexually assaulted her (which the form says sexually abused - same thing).

They would have checked yes on the rape option if they could have used the colloquial usage of the term "rape", but they were restricted because she couldn't confirm to the court whether it was a finger or his penis that he inserted in her vagina. (Which is embarrassing enough for most guys.)

They believed her, that's why they said yes on sexual assault and $2,000,000 in compensatory damages.

WW

 

[Rawley]

Yes, I've said repeatedly that the jury found FPOTUS#45 sexually assaulted her (which the form says sexually abused - same thing).

It's not the same thing. Words matter. Clearly not to Trump haters though

 

[WorldWatcher]

It's not the same thing. Words matter. Clearly not to Trump haters though

Word do matter, which is why you are attempting to lie about the jury not believing Ms. Carroll, though silly word games. And you think you are being cute.

They did believe FPOTUS345 attacked her. Hence the finding of liability and the $2,000,000 in compensatory damages and another $3,000,000 in punitive damages.

Not counting the second damages trial which tacked on another $18,000,000 in compensatory damages and $65,000,000 in punitive damages.

WW

 

[Rawley]

Word do matter, which is why you are attempting to lie about the jury not believing Ms. Carroll, though silly word games. And you think you are being cute.

They did believe FPOTUS345 attacked her. Hence the finding of liability and the $2,000,000 in compensatory damages and another $3,000,000 in punitive damages.

Not counting the second damages trial which tacked on another $18,000,000 in compensatory damages and $65,000,000 in punitive damages.

WW

Have a blessed day. When your argument devolves to puerile personal attacks, we're done.

 

[Care4all]

None of those 60 court cases (except a couple) actually looked at and adjudicated the evidence. They dismissed the cases on technical grounds refusing to try them. I remember one case was dismissed because Trump was required to have filed the case BEFORE the election, before there even was a case! The couple that actually WERE adjudicated, found in favor of Trump.

Those court case suits brought by trump n gang had to show the court their evidence to bring the suit claim to court. Merit. Or standing.

Otherwise we would have a civil court system filled with frivolous suits. The trump team failed to provide any hint of evidence, therefore those cases were dismissed.

 

[Dagosa]

Yeah, I know. Asking you to actually follow threads is like asking a chicken today's headlines.

Which thread ? You should be flaunting it. Never saw any actual evidence or a link to anything that proved anything you say…nothing.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Have a blessed day. When your argument devolves to puerile personal attacks, we're done.

You mean like posting the jury verdict form and explaining it to you, to counter you lying about the jury didn't believe her based on actual court documents?

I understand your need to tap out. But I'll be here the next time you try the "jury didn't believe her line".

Bless your heart.

WW

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Robert, little buddy, there was no rape case.

The liability finding for defamation was bad enough, yes.

 

[Dagosa]

None of those 60 court cases (except a couple) actually looked at and adjudicated the evidence.

That’s a lie. An unadulterated lie. We went through this before. You bozos even claimed there was no evidentiary hearing. Another lie. Preliminary hearings to determine if a judge will take a case and prosecute the case ARE evidentiary hearings…how dumb can you be. Lawyers present their evidence BEFORE the judge decides to prosecute a case. Trumps lawyers for state or plaintiffs in this case presented no evidence.

That’s why they were laughed out of court..60 fucking times. BUT YOU ARE hiding it NOW, RIGHT ? Why don’t you present it to a judge bubba !

 

[toobfreak]

Those court case suits brought by trump n gang had to show the court their evidence

Trump was given mere WEEKS to file and bring complete cases involving DOZENS of complex issues in six states! With every last i dotted and t crossed. So much for our justice system. Meanwhile, cases like OJ, Bill Cosby and others go on for years and years and years. Even this Carroll bitch, she waited 40 years to claim Trump assaulted her and can't even get the year it happened right.

Even your claims of Trump being an insurrectionist, taking papers that didn't belong to him and wrongly filing bank loan papers has taken these courts YEARS to bring to the docket. And they are still failing.

Yet the courts made a circus and a game out of protecting the integrity of our elections giving a one month deadline? SHUT YOUR STUPID PIEHOLE.

 

[toobfreak]

That’s a lie. An unadulterated lie.

Link me to your proof! I've followed these matters closely so I know you can't because you are nothing but a blubbering butthole.

 

[Dagosa]

None of those 60 court cases (except a couple) actually looked at and adjudicated the evidence. They dismissed the cases on technical grounds refusing to try them. I remember one case was dismissed because Trump was required to have filed the case BEFORE the election, before there even was a case! The couple that actually WERE adjudicated, found in favor of Trump.

Link me to your proof! I've followed these matters closely so I know you can't because you are nothing but a blubbering butthole.

Proof of what ? That the courts dismissed Trump 60 times ? You’ve already admitted that. Why do I have to show that ? You already agreed they did.
You’re lying that you have the evidence, but you can’t produce it. WHY didn’t YOU give IT TO A judge ? ,