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

[WorldWatcher]

That is how courts work. Innocent until PROVEN guilty. There was NO evidence of guilt (or liability, for that matter) presented. An accused does not have to prove his innocence. Enough. We both have the understanding of the law. Nothing rehashed on here means anything to the case. It will be overturned or not. Nothing you or I say will change that. If the law and the constitution are followed, EJC will see nothing.

FPOTUS#45 was PROVEN guilty (liable in this civil suit).

There WAS evidence presented, testimony is evidence.

The jury got to decide, and the claimant met the burden of proof for a civil case.

And you are INCORRECT, you are confusing the standards for criminal action v. civil action. In a criminal action the defendent not testifying or presenting a defense cannot be held against them. This isn't true for a civil case. It's up to the jury to weigh that. Way it's been for 250 years, it' isn't changing for FPOTUS#45.

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

Claims were presented. Defendants are told so often it is not even a question, do not testify even when you are innocent. Her witnesses were to her talking to them. They did not witness a thing in that Department store. Who ran the court? A Judge who wanted to convict Trump. I hope when it is Biden's turn to be prosecuted, he gets the same sort of Judge who wants Biden convicted.

Sorry, the FPOTUS#45 as victim card doesn't work. Didn't work for the jury either.

WW

 

[Arlette]

I believe it is your problem. The award was cash due to her claims. She was judged to say the facts. I am thinking a higher court will not agree. As the video I presented brings up.

I see. You were thinking again. That's the problem

 

[Concerned American]

A Judge who wanted to convict Trump.

He ADMITTED so much in public prior to the opening of the trial.

 

[Robert W]

Sorry, the FPOTUS#45 as victim card doesn't work. Didn't work for the jury either.

WW

Are you not aware that there are cases already where the so called guilty defendant was found to be innocent?

Cases​

Innocence Project
https://innocenceproject.org › all-cases



Since 1992, we have helped free or exonerate hundreds of wrongfully convicted people. The cases here are considered closed and reflective of Innocence Project's ...

‎Huwe Burton · ‎Malcolm Alexander · ‎Kirstin Blaise Lobato · ‎Christopher Tapp

How many cases have been cleared by the Innocence Project?


According to the National Registry of Exonerations, 575 wrongly convicted people have been exonerated based on DNA tests that demonstrated their innocence since 1989. That includes 196 Innocence Project clients.Apr 25, 2023

DNA and Wrongful Conviction: Five Facts You Should Know​

 

[Robert W]

I see. You were thinking again. That's the problem

Let us all know if you decide to follow that path.

 

[San Souci]

That's the only kind of woman Trump can get.

Melania is quite lovely ,speaks 5 languages ,and was a credit to the White House. Unlike that race baiting Michelle Obama.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Are you not aware that there are cases already where the so called guilty defendant was found to be innocent?

Yes I am.

But because Bobby was found innocent later has no bearing on whether FPOTUS#45 was liable for his sexual assault and defamation.

Presenting NO defense during the Trial of Fact has cut off any appeal based on "he didn't do it". That appeal path was waived.

WW

 

[Robert W]

Sorry, the FPOTUS#45 as victim card doesn't work. Didn't work for the jury either.

WW

You are right. But it was her that claimed she was his victim. All I am saying here on this forum is a minor thing. I believe he will plead his case to higher courts and they will see if they can mete out justice.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

I find the three women to not be credible. Way too much money in it for them and if you can't see that as a problem, I can do it for you.

Your opinion is worthless. The jury found against Trump. That's all you need to know is that you are wrong.

 

[Robert W]

That's the only kind of woman Trump can get.

Better be aware of E Jean Carroll and her love of suing others. You have demeaned her.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

He cannot plead on factual error. His lack of defense waives that.

 

[Robert W]

Your opinion is worthless. The jury found against Trump. That's all you need to know is that you are wrong.

We all know the Jury ruled against Trump. I am talking of the rest of the courts who get to take a new bite of the apple.

 

[WorldWatcher]

You are right. But it was her that claimed she was his victim. All I am saying here on this forum is a minor thing. I believe he will plead his case to higher courts and they will see if they can mete out justice.

He will try. But he perserved no aspect of "I didnt do it" by waiving putting on any defense during the Trial of Fact and by not objecting to the evidence presented by the claimaint.

The appeals court isn't going to overturn the base decision in the Trial of Fact, they may reduce somewhat the punitive damages. But the liability will remain.

WW

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

There is no apple to bite. He failed to provide a defense. That avenue is over.

 

[WorldWatcher]

We all know the Jury ruled against Trump. I am talking of the rest of the courts who get to take a new bite of the apple.

That's what you are not getting. He doesn't get "a new bite at the apple" for the Trial of Fact. He waived that by not presenting a defense or objecting to the claimants evidence.

The only grounds that can be argued is misapplication of the law or an error on the part of the trial judge. Judge Kaplan has 30 years experience on the bench, so that isn't very likely.

WW

 

[Robert W]

He will try. But he perserved no aspect of "I didnt do it" by waiving putting on any defense during the Trial of Fact and by not objecting to the evidence presented by the claimaint.

The appeals court isn't going to overturn the base decision in the Trial of Fact, they may reduce somewhat the punitive damages. But the liability will remain.

WW

You probably are right about the appeals court and I am trying to take it past that court.

 

[WorldWatcher]

You probably are right about the appeals court and I am trying to take it past that court.

For an appeal to the SCOTUS there has to be Constitutional issues involved.

What would those be?

WW

 

[Robert W]

That's what you are not getting. He doesn't get "a new bite at the apple" for the Trial of Fact. He waived that by not presenting a defense or objecting to the claimants evidence.

The only grounds that can be argued is misapplication of the law or an error on the part of the trial judge. Judge Kaplan has 30 years experience on the bench, so that isn't very likely.

WW

Trump will appeal $83.3 million E. Jean Carroll verdict​

Reuters
https://www.reuters.com › legal › litigation › trump-walk...



Jan 27, 2024 — Donald Trump was handed a stinging defeat on Friday by a Manhattan jury that ordered him to pay $83.3 million to the writer E. Jean Carroll, ...

 

[surada]

He still lost and has to pay $83 million for his transgressions. You act like since it was not a criminal conviction, the incident never happened? That is ridiculous!

He was found liable in a court of law. Full stop. Period. The incident occurred and Trump is a piece of shit!

I love how you fuckers jump through hoops to defend this rapist and soon to be criminal 91 times.

OJ Simpson lost in civil action.