… a judge in New York, Lewis A Kaplan, said that when Carroll repeated her allegation that Trump raped her, her words were “substantially true”. Kaplan also set out in detail why it may be said that Trump raped Carroll. … “The jury … was instructed that it could find that Mr Trump ‘raped’ Ms Carroll only if it found that he forcibly penetrated Ms Carroll’s vagina with his penis. “It could not find that he ‘raped’ her if it determined that Mr Trump forcibly penetrated Ms Carroll’s private sexual parts with his fingers – which commonly is considered ‘rape’ in other contexts – because the New York penal law definition of rape is limited to penile penetration.”
Trump denied the allegations, prompting Carroll to sue him for defamation in November 2019 … A verdict in May 2023 found Trump liable for sexually abusing and defaming Carroll … Judge Kaplan clarified that the jury had found that Trump had raped Carroll according to the common definition of the word. … In September 2023, Kaplan issued a partial summary judgment regarding Carroll I, finding Trump liable for defamation via his 2019 statements.
civil only needs a preponderance of evidence. criminal requires beyond a reasonable doubt. but even that isn’t high enough, in my opinion, to justify the government taking away peoples’ freedom.
Not suspected:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/07/donald-trump-rape-language-e-jean-carroll
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._Jean_Carroll_v._Donald_J._Trump
Removed by mod
Worse. It was a finding of fact. It’s a fact that Trump is a rapist.
civil only needs a preponderance of evidence. criminal requires beyond a reasonable doubt. but even that isn’t high enough, in my opinion, to justify the government taking away peoples’ freedom.
Removed by mod
“You can talk like you’re authoritative on the subject…”
Talks like they’re authoritative on the subject without providing a single shred of backup.
🤌
Removed by mod
“Decades ago, the now President of the United States raped me.” - E. Jean Carroll
Removed by mod
Removed by mod