The title of this thread does not hold up. It should be "trump, the more likely than not sexual assaulter". The cringe evidence mentioned about what Trumps said to Bush on a bus should not even be considered by the jury. A general statement made years later does not prove a specific incident. If that was the deciding factor, it was a long stretch by the jury to link the two together. I don't know but I almost think the fix was in. The plaintiff could not bend the truth far enough for it to be rape. There was just no hard evidence so they said, "yeah, he probably grabbed her pussy but maybe not."
not just the title, but the first post "Ms. Carroll kept the dress with semen stains" was a lie. there was never any semen stain anywhere involved with anything its just totally made the fuck up
So how do you sue for defamation when you accuse someone of rape, but there was no rape and the Jury found no rape.
Of course they did. This was not a criminal rape trial. This was a civil defamation trial. The jury did NOT reject that rape occurred; only that the defamation verdict could be supported by sexual abuse alone without having to meet the higher technical burden of what constitutes rape under New York law. All along, Ms. Carroll has accused trump of RAPE. trump denied the RAPE. Carroll's credibility was the entire basis of her CIVIL case. The jury found her credible, thus the defamation. The verdict didn't require an explicit finding of rape when a lesser legal burden of sexual abuse sufficed, but make no mistake: they decided that the rape occurred. trump incited an insurrection, according to his own convicted supporters and foot soldiers. And now a jury found Ms. Carroll's rape accusations to be valid. That's the trash you support.
That's false. The jury didn't "found no rape". They merely said that Carroll didn't prove the rape with a preponderance of evidence. She didn't have to prove the rape in order for the jury to believe her... and it's very obvious that they did.
again, the jury did not decide rape. The left news even agrees with that. From CNN: While the jury found that Trump sexually abused E. Jean Carroll in 1996, sufficient to hold him liable for battery, the jury did not find that Carroll proved he raped her. He does not face any jail time as a result of the civil verdict.
Now let's make this perfectly clear: will this loss to Ms. Carroll cost him votes among his supporters? Of course not. They already know that he grabs women by the pussy without invitation and that's perfectly OK with them. trump even doubled down on his boast during his deposition, proving that "grab them by the pussy" wasn't just locker room talk but his actual practice.... so Ms. Carroll in the trumpian view is just another woman WHO DESERVES to be raped by their cult leader.
He was never in danger of facing jail time in this civil case. Correct, the jury did not find that Carroll proved he raped her. That does not mean he did not rape her, and doesn't mean they don't believe he raped her. They obviously found her credible, and she's been accusing rape all along. A rape verdict was not necessary to grant her defamation claims.
