- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
A federal judge Monday dismissed former President Trump’s claim that E. Jean Carroll defamed him in May after a jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing the writer.
The day after the verdict, Carroll appeared on CNN and indicated Trump had raped her. The jury had not found Trump liable for rape under New York’s definition, but instead found him liable for sexual abuse.
Trump then claimed Carroll’s insistence on CNN amounted to defamation, filing a counterclaim in Carroll’s other lawsuit that has not yet gone to trial.
U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan on Monday dismissed Trump’s argument, ruling Carroll’s statement on the cable network was substantially true and that “[t]here would have been no different effect on the mind of an average listener.”
“The difference between Ms. Carroll’s allegedly defamatory statements — that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as defined in the New York Penal Law — and the ‘truth’ — that Mr. Trump forcibly digitally penetrated Ms. Carroll — is minimal. Both are felonious sex crimes,” Kaplan ruled.
Kaplan, a Clinton appointee, separately rejected Trump’s defense that he has “absolute presidential immunity” in the case.
Why would you defend a rapist? Trump is a rapist, as proven in court. Forcibly fingering someone is rape, by definition.
Trump is a rapist piece of shit. This was proven in court. It was been affirmed he is a rapist when his defamation case was tossed, because the statements that he raped Carroll are factual, and cannot be considered defamatory, because he is, in fact, a rapist.
Why would you take anything I said as “defending” him? Read it again.
You’re not a convicted rapist when you haven’t been convicted. There is no conviction in a civil suit. He was not criminally charged.
Civil suits are not the same as criminal ones. The burden of proof is significantly higher in a criminal case, which is likely why she went the civil route - because she knew that she would never win a criminal suit.