Jury orders Trump to pay woman $83 million for calling her a liar for saying he raped her

A jury in New York has ordered former U.S. President Trump to pay a woman $83 million because he called her a liar, after she claimed he raped her.

This is absolutely ridiculous, seems to defy all logic and common sense, and just goes to show how much bias can exist in the jury system.
Although Trump came from the New York City area, most of the people there very much loathe him.
(New York City is a political Democratic Party bastion, and Trump was the rival Republican Party nominee and successfully won the election for President)

E. Jean Carroll sued Donald Trump for defamation.
This was separate from and after she had already sued him for allegedly raping her.

Jury Orders Trump to Pay E. Jean Carroll $83 Million for Defamation, Corinne Ramey, The Wall Street Journal, January 26, 2024


related thread: Jury says Trump has to pay $5 million to woman who accused him of rape (posted by kazenatsu in Latest US & World News, on May 9, 2023 )

Practically the only evidence is the woman said it happened.

And lots of progressives on the Left seem to think a woman should be given tons of money if she says she was a victim... no matter how long ago it supposedly was.


So if you're a politician and some woman claims you raped her, with no evidence, and you publicly call her a liar, she can sue you for defamation, for ruining her reputation?

Everyone who is willing to be honest with themselves knows that sort of logic is absurd.

For one thing, there are obvious double standards being applied in these two cases. In one case, the burden is on Trump to prove it did not happen or he is found guilty. The court automatically believes the accuser but not the person being accused. Trump was being required to prove that the other person was not telling the truth.
But then in this other case, the burden is on Trump to prove that he is telling the truth.

If anything, we should expect the jury should have to award Trump money for her damaging his reputation.
It's like right has become wrong, and wrong has become right, everything turned upside down in a crazy clown world, a kangaroo court.

This aside from the obvious fact that $83 million is a ridiculously absurd amount for defamation damages. The alleged "victim" Jean Carroll is not worth anywhere near that amount. The jury only decided this amount because everyone knows Trump is very rich.

If anyone believes that they can trust a jury to decide the truth of a case, this story proves that is not always true.

 

Trump seems to have kept his mouth shut so far
So it looks like it worked.

 

Trump lost in the rape trial.

Everything since then is about Trump's assault on her.

The question remaining is whether the amount was enough to get him to ****.

Do you think it was enough?

 

I see lots of those on the Left are just fine with inventing reality, and will even gloat and brag over it.

This calls to mind Communist tactics, where the controlling Party could say that facts were whatever they wished, and it would be accepted.

The mainstream news in the U.S. seems to be giving the outcome of this case lots of coverage, with the insinuation to suggest maybe Trump is a rapist, rather than looking at the ridiculous absurdity of the verdicts in both cases and weaponization of the court system.

 

This case won't be settled until the appeals are done. Years, at least.

 

Of course he will.

But, what will his premise be?

My bet is that at some point, Trump will throw his pathetic lawyer under the bus - claiming he had poor council

But, he's know from his scores of legal interactions with the courts that Habba is absolutely worthless.

 

No, he is a convicted rapist. Remember?

And, let's remember that if Trump continues defaming and otherwise attacking Carroll she is free to lodge another civil case against him for those attacks. She would hardly need to change the paperwork.

 

Well my guess is they'll start with the constitutionality of the law, move onto judicial bias and the reliability of the "evidence".

 

The list of Trump quotes and acts concerning Carroll is LONG and majorly disgusting. So, that's more than covered.

The results of those constant attacks include disturbed individuals taking physical action against Carroll - another significant and scary list, involving her not being able to reside in her home.

Judicial bias? That is absolutely NOT going to work.

He MIGHT try to throw his legal team under the bus - claiming he had incompetent council. I doubt that would work, either.

 

Then please present them to us, so all of us can better decide for ourselves whether this defamation verdict has any justification whatsoever.

 

In my opinion, it's not fair to blame Trump for other individuals acting out based on his comments. If he actually incited those criminal acts, that would be one thing, but I do not think that is the case.

Anyone who is informed of the details of this case (as well as all the relevant background information) knows this woman is a liar, like Trump stated. If these deranged Trump supporters are acting out, it's not because of what Trump said, but because of the truth of what she did.

 

LOL!

Do it yourself.

Maybe you should read TruthSocial. I've seen vids that show long lists of unbelievably personal and despicable tirades against Carroll in the last few days.

 

It is one highly logical outcome. Plus, some of those acts have been traced to being motivated by Trump's despicable tirades against his rape victim.

 

Glad we have a legal scholar to keep us on the straight and narrow.
The law carroll sued under to begin with is on shaky ground.
Judicial bias in this case is certainly an issue.
And the evidence that the encounter ever even ocurred is about as solid as quicksand.

 

Why are you constantly attempting to protect this rapist?

 

Conveniently you'll never tell us what the evidence is that what she claimed ever happened.

 

This case was not about the rape. Trump already lost that in a previous case. The jurors were correctly informed that the rape is not in question.

What do you think shows judicial bias?

 

So you're claiming that Trump should still have been found liable for defamation even if it were proven the rape never happened, and that she was in fact a liar?

 

Yes. If you care about this case, you will read about it.

There will be transcripts available, and you can find comments by Trump on Carroll, assaults faced by Carroll, etc.

 

Silly argument. The jurors WERE well informed. They decided Trump was liable. Their $5 million dollar award did nothing to stop Trump's continued defamation of Carroll - thus the next jury decided that a much higher award was necessary to prevent further defamation. Every bit of this was caused by
Trump's diarrhea of the mouth. End of story.

 

It's unfair and unreasonable to expect me to have to exert the effort to prove that something doesn't exist. Since it's a lot easier to try to show the existence of something than to try to show that something does not exist.
Usually the burden of evidence is on the side that claims something does exist.

 

I agree the jurors were well informed. But it is clear they were very biased.
(In fact I think saying that they were "very biased" is a dramatic understatement)

Part of this is the insane views so many progressives seem to have about lawsuits and accusations by women who claim a man committed a sexual misdeed against them.
But a bigger part of it was probably their hatred and loathing of Trump, what I can only assume is their lack of morality and principles, and "means justify the ends" mentality.
We do have to remember the jury pool was in New York City, which explains a lot.
I'd imagine this jury was just looking for any excuse to rule against Trump, and it didn't take much to convince them.

 

But that is not reality. The Jury DID find Trump liable. One party or the other is ALWAYS disappointed with ANY jury's decision - that doesn't make
the US Law system a failed one. There is always a loser ... and that describes Trump to a T.

 

No - YOU WANT them to be biased cause YOUR team lost. It's like the losing football team always calls "bias" of the refs. If Trump had won, you
would have painted MAGA on your Trump and declared your team the victor. It's all become stupid team sports.

 

I gave you one source.

There are many others.