"there is no evidence of any sperm cells on the dress" https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...ial-writer-accused-rape-judge-rules-rcna70807
His main source is wikipedia. Plus, he's missing a gene. He got Monica Lewinsky all mixed up. He might not get paid today.
That's what's called harping on a detail that's not critical to the story (your typical dishonest ploy). Doesn't matter if it was semen or slobber... trump denies having ever been in contact with her. GUILTY. Your pretense to care for truth is quite comical.
detail? jizz on a dress or no jizz? in a rape trial? bro that aint a minor detail. having a dude's jizz on a dress is no minor detail. its a massively important piece of evidence. you lied. read the lab report. its says they looked for semen and found none, in 33 places on the dress they looked https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23607028-e-jean-carroll-dress-lab-report
Didn't. Was I mistaken? Maybe. Wasn't even critical to the point. Why won't you address the POINT, you dishonest p.o.s.?
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23607028-e-jean-carroll-dress-lab-report true or false, this lab report shows they looked for semen and found none?
true or false, this lab report shows they looked for semen and found none? https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23607028-e-jean-carroll-dress-lab-report why did you claim there was semen on the dress?
