“As the court explained in its recent decision denying Mr Trump’s motion for a new trial on damages and other relief [in the New York case] … based on all of the evidence at trial and the jury’s verdict as a whole, the jury’s finding that Mr Trump ‘sexually abused’ Ms Carroll implicitly determined that he forcibly penetrated her digitally – in other words, that Mr. Trump, in fact, did ‘rape’ Ms. Carroll as that term commonly is used and understood in contexts outside of the New York penal law.” - Lewis A. Kaplan: Senior Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Listen, I’m not a lawyer, I’m not trying to say I am.
It’s widely understood that civil litigation is held to a lower level of scrutiny than criminal proceedings are.
It’s widely accepted that jury trials are more prone to error than other types of hearings.
The legal meaning of the word “implicit” in that sentence is something close to “we didn’t ask the jury about this, but something they did rule on could be interpreted as implying it”.
I’m not making an excuse for trump or normalizing rape when I say the following:
You have been corrected because you are very obviously wrong. Are you going to integrate this correction into your espoused views going forward or are you just going to repeat the same brain dead bullshit again and again?
By “digging into” do you mean “reading about it on truth social”? Because that is the only way in which someone might look into this situation and conclude trump isn’t guilty
Removed by mod
“As the court explained in its recent decision denying Mr Trump’s motion for a new trial on damages and other relief [in the New York case] … based on all of the evidence at trial and the jury’s verdict as a whole, the jury’s finding that Mr Trump ‘sexually abused’ Ms Carroll implicitly determined that he forcibly penetrated her digitally – in other words, that Mr. Trump, in fact, did ‘rape’ Ms. Carroll as that term commonly is used and understood in contexts outside of the New York penal law.” - Lewis A. Kaplan: Senior Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Am I reading this right that it’s because a civil decision by jury implies rape?
Pretty much, except it may be more appropriate to replace “implies” with “determined there was sufficient evidence to conclude”
Listen, I’m not a lawyer, I’m not trying to say I am.
It’s widely understood that civil litigation is held to a lower level of scrutiny than criminal proceedings are.
It’s widely accepted that jury trials are more prone to error than other types of hearings.
The legal meaning of the word “implicit” in that sentence is something close to “we didn’t ask the jury about this, but something they did rule on could be interpreted as implying it”.
I’m not making an excuse for trump or normalizing rape when I say the following:
That is paper fucking thin.
A civil court conviction seems like enough for me
He’s been on Epsteins plane 7 times. He was his friend.
Trump also knew Epstein liked “younger girls”.
It’s all in court documents
You have been corrected because you are very obviously wrong. Are you going to integrate this correction into your espoused views going forward or are you just going to repeat the same brain dead bullshit again and again?
By “digging into” do you mean “reading about it on truth social”? Because that is the only way in which someone might look into this situation and conclude trump isn’t guilty
It’s virtually impossible to smear Trump, because what could you come to with that’s worse than the truth?
Ever the optimist I see