$83.3 million reasons why?

[jomar]

Evidence that supported Trump's defense was not not allowed in court. 83 million is laughable and will be overturned in a court of appeal.

Now tell us exactly why such alleged evidence wasn’t allowed.

 

[Bn2f]

Evidence that supported Trump's defense was not not allowed in court. 83 million is laughable and will be overturned in a court of appeal.

Please, send trump more of your money for his "appeal"
Mortgage your house, why dontcha!

 

[coati]

Miscarriage of justice, another activist judge steering the Jury for a desired outcome. It will be appealed and overturned.

Sorry, Cupcake, but there are no grounds for appeal. Your cult leader is stuck with this one, and his big mouth would dig him in even deeper.

Damn, you Deplorables are the dumbest subculture on planet Earth! Keep sending him money, suckers.

 

[jaF0]

Damn, just realized how well this thread (despite the fact it's a duplicate of others) goes so well with the chart I just posted. MAGAts feel the economy is poor and they don't have enough money for basics because they're sending so much to a billionaire con man, sex offender and liar.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Miscarriage of justice, another activist judge steering the Jury for a desired outcome. It will be appealed and overturned. SAD

I’ll bite, appealed on what grounds?

 

[jaF0]

^^^ On accounta' the Judge was a big fat meanine head that probably didn't vote for The Don and wouldn't let him ramble on incessantly.

 

[colddiesel]

Evidence that supported Trump's defense was not not allowed in court. 83 million is laughable and will be overturned in a court of appeal.

The only purpose of this hearing was to determine quantum. In the substantive matter almost a year ago Trump elected not to run evidence to defend himself - his choice ! As the previous case had already determined the fact that Trump was a rapist and that Trump did not dispute it, the only issue to be determined was quantum and obviously Trump was not permitted to re-run the original case. I can see that an appeals court might reduce the punitive damages but the grounds in law to reduce anything else are difficult to perceive at all.

 

[Philthy_Phil]

Evidence that supported Trump's defense was not not allowed in court. 83 million is laughable and will be overturned in a court of appeal.

Keep crying, trumptard.

 

[icanhelp1]

Now tell us exactly why such alleged evidence wasn’t allowed.

Dershowitz: the Trump-Carroll verdict is a Rorschach test​

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_80,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fe4e225f9-7a41-4513-bd6a-92b8b69d011e_456x455.jpeg
ALAN DERSHOWITZ
MAY 10, 2023


The mixed verdict delivered by the jury in the Donald Trump civil rape case will be interpreted differently by those who support and oppose the former president.
On the main count that Trump raped E. Jean Carroll, the nine-person jury unanimously found that he did not. The plaintiff could not even satisfy its low burden of proof, namely proof beyond a preponderance of the evidence. In so finding, the jury apparently disbelieved at least part of the plaintiff’s testimony. She was very specific about being raped, not merely sexually abused or molested, as the jury did find.
It’s a strange verdict. The jury seems to have believed some of her testimony; namely that she had an encounter with Trump at Bergdorf Goodman in the mid-1990s, which Trump has adamantly denied, both in depositions and in public statements. He did not appear at trial either to testify or to sit in the courtroom, but his lawyer presented his denials to the jury.
It is also hard to reconcile the jury’s finding that he did not rape her with its finding that he maliciously defamed her by essentially saying that he did not rape her.
Accordingly, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to which this case will be appealed, will have its work cut out for it. There will be other substantial issues as well on appeal. They include the extension of the statute of limitations, after it had already expired, which allowed the plaintiff to bring a quarter-century-old case. This may well constitute denial of due process as guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. Other appellate issues will include the judge’s strange ruling that the names of the jurors will remain anonymous even to the lawyers, thus denying them the ability to research them and determine whether any hidden biases may have existed. This may violate the defendant’s constitutional right to trial by jury guaranteed by the Seventh Amendment.

 

[icanhelp1]

^^^^^^^

Additional appellate issues will include the judge’s decision to admit some evidence presented by the plaintiff, such as the infamous Access Hollywood tape, in which Trump says that women permit celebrities to touch their private parts, as well as the testimony of other women who were deemed to corroborate the plaintiff’s testimony. The judge also excluded some evidence that the defendant sought to admit.

All in all, if the appellant in this case had a name other than Donald Trump, there is a good likelihood that the entire verdict might be reversed. But almost nobody, whether they be a judge or a juror, doesn’t have strong views about the former president. Whether these views impact judicial decisions is a question about which reasonable people might disagree.

The impact of this decision on Trump’s political aspirations is also uncertain. The mixed verdict is something of a Rorschach test. Supporters of Trump will point to the jury’s verdict that he did not commit rape. Opponents of Trump will point to the verdicts against him on the other charges, as well as the $5 million that Trump will be obliged to pay her unless he wins the appeal.

The verdict is unlikely to hurt Trump’s chances of securing the Republican nomination, since his base is unlikely to be influenced negatively — and that base is probably large enough to secure the nomination. But it may well impact independent voters in the general election. President Biden’s sinking polls suggest that if the candidates in November 2024 are Trump and Biden, this will be an election of negatives: who do you dislike least?

 

[ll74]

^^^^^^^

Additional appellate issues will include the judge’s decision to admit some evidence presented by the plaintiff, such as the infamous Access Hollywood tape, in which Trump says that women permit celebrities to touch their private parts, as well as the testimony of other women who were deemed to corroborate the plaintiff’s testimony. The judge also excluded some evidence that the defendant sought to admit.

All in all, if the appellant in this case had a name other than Donald Trump, there is a good likelihood that the entire verdict might be reversed. But almost nobody, whether they be a judge or a juror, doesn’t have strong views about the former president. Whether these views impact judicial decisions is a question about which reasonable people might disagree.

The impact of this decision on Trump’s political aspirations is also uncertain. The mixed verdict is something of a Rorschach test. Supporters of Trump will point to the jury’s verdict that he did not commit rape. Opponents of Trump will point to the verdicts against him on the other charges, as well as the $5 million that Trump will be obliged to pay her unless he wins the appeal.

The verdict is unlikely to hurt Trump’s chances of securing the Republican nomination, since his base is unlikely to be influenced negatively — and that base is probably large enough to secure the nomination. But it may well impact independent voters in the general election. President Biden’s sinking polls suggest that if the candidates in November 2024 are Trump and Biden, this will be an election of negatives: who do you dislike least?

The current case is defamation. The rape case concluded long ago.

 

[icanhelp1]

The current case is defamation. The rape case concluded long ago.

I’m referring to the rape case, why? because it carries over to the defamation settlement which was deemed insane by most legal scholars I watched. Trump cannot get a fair trial in NY.

 

[ll74]

I’m referring to the rape case, why? because it carries over to the defamation settlement which was deemed insane by most legal scholars I watched. Trump cannot get a fair trial in NY.

Whether he defamed her is irrelevant to the case before.

They presented their evidence and the jury rules that he defamed her.

Your "most legal scholars" line is hilarious.

 

[Sparky74]

Oh boo hoo for poor Donald

 

[Bebode]

Now tell us exactly why such alleged evidence wasn’t allowed.

Because a judge ruled a summary judgement on the 2019 defamation lawsuit. This “trial” was about $$$. Trump wasn’t allowed to show evidence to the jury or mount a defense because the judgement of liability/guilt had already been found.

 

[icanhelp1]

Because a judge ruled a summary judgement on the 2019 defamation lawsuit. This “trial” was about $$$. Trump wasn’t allowed to show evidence to the jury or mount a defense because the judgement of liability/guilt had already been found.

EXACTLY!!!

Guilty till proven guilty, More Lititia James Fani Willis style lawfare.

I read somewhere that NY actually changed the laws governing statutes of limitations just so they could try this case. NY is corrupt to the core.

 

[ll74]

Because a judge ruled a summary judgement on the 2019 defamation lawsuit. This “trial” was about $$$. Trump wasn’t allowed to show evidence to the jury or mount a defense because the judgement of liability/guilt had already been found.

He was allowed. His lawyer fucked up on every level.

 

[KeithD]

Because a judge ruled a summary judgement on the 2019 defamation lawsuit.

That's because Trump passed on a jury trial, which he could have had. Stop being a dummy.

 

[Sparky74]

Gosh I thought the people here in the UK were unbelievably foolish and thick headed for voting for Boris but I genuinely can't believe Americans can really be that idiotic to actually vote for Trump in as President Twice surely, it's Like Turkeys saying they love Thanksgiving

Please Please America don't do it.

 

[Bebode]

That's because Trump passed on a jury trial, which he could have had. Stop being a dummy.

No he wasn’t. It was a mandated bench trial. Dummy.

 

[ll74]

No he wasn’t. It was a mandated bench trial. Dummy.

It was not. Maybe read more.

 

[Bebode]

It was not. Maybe read

"Accordingly, given that the substantive content of Mr. Trump's 2022 statement, which the jury in Carroll II found to be defamatory, is identical to the substantive content of Mr. Trump's 2019 statements, the jury's finding in Carroll II is controlling in this case," the judge wrote.

So this case was given summary judgement based on the 2nd case which did have a jury.

 

[ll74]

"Accordingly, given that the substantive content of Mr. Trump's 2022 statement, which the jury in Carroll II found to be defamatory, is identical to the substantive content of Mr. Trump's 2019 statements, the jury's finding in Carroll II is controlling in this case," the judge wrote.

So this case was given summary judgement based on the 2nd case which did have a jury.

That doesn't confirm your original statement

Trump's lawyer fucked up.

 

[Sparky74]

"Accordingly, given that the substantive content of Mr. Trump's 2022 statement, which the jury in Carroll II found to be defamatory, is identical to the substantive content of Mr. Trump's 2019 statements, the jury's finding in Carroll II is controlling in this case," the judge wrote.

So this case was given summary judgement based on the 2nd case which did have a jury.

It's so funny Trump is like a Adult Baby he just shouts and doesn't even have reasoned conversations, he's not even that intelligent he just thinks money can fix everything His Slogan Maga is Absolutely Laughable

 

[Bebode]

That doesn't confirm your original statement

Trump's lawyer fucked up.

A summary judgment is a judgment entered by a court for one party and against another party without a full trial.

But please, continue to tell me to “read more”

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/summary_judgment