It's hard to find on Google, so here's what you need to know about E. Jean Carroll, most of which was deemed "inadmissible" by the judge:
- She couldn't recall the date, month, season, or year the incident happened - She never told anyone about it, despite being publicly obsessed with her own sexuality - The dress she claims to have been wearing didn't exist at the time - Her description of the dressing room at Bergdorf Goodman was inaccurate, making her sequence of events impossible - Her lawsuit was bankrolled by Jeffrey Epstein pal and Democrat (and Nikki Haley) mega-donor Reid Hoffman - Democrats created a law (The Adult Survivors Act in 2022) to enable her lawsuit to proceed - Her accusation is the exact plotline of an episode of Law & Order (one of her "favorite shows") - Trump's Apprentice was also one of her favorite shows - She has a history of falsely accusing men of r*pe, including Les Moonves - She told Anderson Cooper, "most people think of r*pe as being sexy. Think of the fantasies." - She made a career promoting promiscuity, even writing glowingly of sexual assault and naming her cat Vagina
It's hard to find on Google, so here's what you need to know about E. Jean Carroll, most of which was deemed "inadmissible" by the judge:
- She couldn't recall the date, month, season, or year the incident happened - She never told anyone about it, despite being publicly obsessed with her own sexuality - The dress she claims to have been wearing didn't exist at the time - Her description of the dressing room at Bergdorf Goodman was inaccurate, making her sequence of events impossible - Her lawsuit was bankrolled by Jeffrey Epstein pal and Democrat (and Nikki Haley) mega-donor Reid Hoffman - Democrats created a law (The Adult Survivors Act in 2022) to enable her lawsuit to proceed - Her accusation is the exact plotline of an episode of Law & Order (one of her "favorite shows") - Trump's Apprentice was also one of her favorite shows - She has a history of falsely accusing men of r*pe, including Les Moonves - She told Anderson Cooper, "most people think of r*pe as being sexy. Think of the fantasies." - She made a career promoting promiscuity, even writing glowingly of sexual assault and naming her cat Vagina
All of which is irrelevant to yesterdays verdict. It was a defamation case, and wasnt about any sexual assault. The verdict was decided by the jury, rather than the judge. Maybe he just ought to keep his mouth shut, and his opinions to himself. That would save him a lot of money. Settling the case would have also saved him a fortune, but he is too stupid to do that. He could have settled the case for 10 million. Remind again who is the certified nut job?
Jurors heard closing arguments in the case earlier on Friday, with Ms Carroll's lawyer telling them that Trump should pay "dearly" for defaming her.
A separate jury ordered Trump to pay Ms Carroll $5m (£3.9m) last year after finding him liable of sexually abusing her in a Bergdorf Goodman department store in New York in the mid-1990s. They also found him liable of defaming her after she wrote about the incident.
The trial that ended today focused only on what damages the former US president would have to pay for defaming her.
The amount is considerably more than the $10m (£7.9m) Ms Carroll had been seeking.
"We all have to follow the law," Ms Kaplan said. "Donald Trump, however, acts as if these rules and laws just don't apply to him."
- She has a history of falsely accusing men of r*pe, including Les Moonves.
I did a 'Hard to find Google search' on Les Moonves.
The story by Ronan Farrow cites six women with allegations against Moonves that date from the 1980s to the 2000s.
The actress and writer Illeana Douglas told Farrow that Moonves assaulted her during a business meeting
"In a millisecond, he's got one arm over me, pinning me," Douglas said. "What it feels like to have someone hold you down – you can't breathe, you can't move," she said. Douglas told Farrow that Moonves was "violently kissing" her, and then, "aroused, pulled up her skirt and began to thrust against her."
Another Nutjob?
On December 18, 2018, CBS announced that the board would deny Moonves his $120 million severance pay, as their investigation had found Moonves violated his contract. According to investigators, claims made by the women were credible and led to more claims that were found to be credible during the course of the investigation.
....more nutjobs?
Weird how to like to defend rapists and serial sex offenders.
Now do Bill Clinton and all the others who visited Epsteins island multiple times. Where's the speedy trial for those?
It's a political hit job.
Jeffrey Epstein list: Who is named in court filings?
The names of dozens of people connected to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein were made public with the release of court documents. Who are they?
Public figures including Prince Andrew and former US President Bill Clinton are among the associates, friends and alleged victims named in the 900 pages unsealed on the order of a judge in New York.
Both the former US president and the British royal deny any knowledge of Epstein's crimes.
Many names in the documents are mentioned in passing as part of various legal proceedings, and their inclusion does not suggest wrongdoing related to Epstein.
They contain no major new allegations about Epstein nor revelations about his associates.
Epstein took his own life in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial. His friend and former girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell is serving 20 years in prison for child sex trafficking.
Who is now named in the documents?
Bill Clinton
The former US president is mentioned a number of times but there is no suggestion of any criminality.
Johanna Sjoberg, one of Prince Andrew's accusers, testified that Epstein told her that Mr Clinton "likes them young, referring to girls".
Another woman, Virginia Giuffre, who brought the lawsuit at the heart of these court documents, also mentions the American politician several times.
Although she makes no allegations against Mr Clinton, she was trying to get him to testify under oath about his relationship with Epstein, describing him as a "key person".
She had previously said Mr Clinton visited Mr Epstein's private island but in the court documents both Maxwell and Epstein dispute this. There is also no record in pilot logs of Mr Clinton going there.
Mr Clinton himself has said he flew on Epstein's plane four times, including twice to Africa, because they worked together on humanitarian projects.
But those meetings took place before the financier came under investigation, he said, and he had no knowledge of his crimes.
Donald Trump
The document also includes testimony about Donald Trump from Ms Sjoberg about a diversion Epstein's plane made to New Jersey to visit the businessman in 2001 at one of his casinos.
When pilots said their plane could not land in New York and would need to stop in Atlantic City, Epstein said he would call up Trump and drop by to see him, she said.
The documents contain no alleged wrongdoing by Mr Trump.
Ms Sjoberg is asked whether she ever gave Mr Trump a massage and she said she did not.
'There's no appeal here': Lawyer shows how Alina Habba dashed Trump's hope of nixing award
"Let me ruin the suspense for everyone. Trump doesn't have an appeal," he said on Friday. "I know the talking heads on TV (who have never tried a case or appealed a jury verdict) have to mention it. Here's why it isn't going to fly."
Manookian went on to say that, in order to have a meritorious case on appeal, "you have to preserve a reversible error at the trial level."
"This is why you hire competent counsel. You need someone who actually knows the rules of evidence and procedure. Alina Habba had no clue what was occurring throughout the trial," he added. "She not only failed to preserve any remote grounds for appeal, like a moron, she repeatedly and unintentionally waived them over and over."
He went on to include an example of Habba bungling the potential for a reversal.
"For example, she kept saying 'no objection' as exhibits were entered into evidence. It appeared to me that she was saying that because she that's something she had heard real lawyers say before," he said Friday. "Unfortunately for Mr. Trump, what she was doing over and over was waiving his ability to appeal over those evidentiary issues. Because she is a moron who would rather *play* lawyer than do the research to *be* a lawyer."
Manookian then concluded: "There's no appeal here. And because people have asked me in the past, no, there is no such thing as an incompetent counsel defense in civil cases. That's for criminal matters. Take this verdict to the bank."
I would be slow to believe anything that man says. Firstly, he is qualified in a totally different State (Tennessee). Secondly, he has a long and colourful history, being permanently at war with just about everybody, particularly his State Ethical Board. He has been suspended twice, and is facing possible disbarment at present.
Trump's lawyer has more facts than an outsider. And has to run with what her client tells her which, again, an outsider does not know what that is. So to call her a "moron" is just poor.
Trump has a long history of blaming all around him for his own errors. The facts are very simple in this case.
He declined to appear in person in a civil trial in relation to the alleged sexual assault. So he lost that case. He then declared to millions that the victim was a liar, too ugly for him to sexually assault her, all the usual stuff. And declared the Court system is corrupt. The Court he was too scared, or too foolish, to attend when it mattered.
He is the man who put the genital in congenital idiot
I would be slow to believe anything that man says. Firstly, he is qualified in a totally different State (Tennessee). Secondly, he has a long and colourful history, being permanently at war with just about everybody, particularly his State Ethical Board. He has been suspended twice, and is facing possible disbarment at present.
Trump's lawyer has more facts than an outsider. And has to run with what her client tells her which, again, an outsider does not know what that is. So to call her a "moron" is just poor.
Trump has a long history of blaming all around him for his own errors. The facts are very simple in this case.
He declined to appear in person in a civil trial in relation to the alleged sexual assault. So he lost that case. He then declared to millions that the victim was a liar, too ugly for him to sexually assault her, all the usual stuff. And declared the Court system is corrupt. The Court he was too scared, or too foolish, to attend when it mattered.
He is the man who put the genital in congenital idiot
So do you think he is right on this occasion, and there are no grounds for appeal.
Depends what you mean by "right". Because rent-a-quote has framed his question to suit his answer.
He is restricting his comments to 1 particular appeal. He starts by saying Trump's Lawyer has been Negligent, and that is no basis for an appeal.
I am not qualified in the particular State in question (neither is Manookian), but in most national/state laws, you cannot appeal a Civil (as opposed to Criminal) decision just because your Lawyer gets things wrong. For 2 reasons-firstly, in Civil Law that is irrelevant, and because it is always open to the Client to sue their Lawyer.
Is it possible to appeal the decision on other grounds? I doubt it, but I don't know for sure. And Manookian fails to mention that at all.
The problem Trump will face on liability is clear. The facts speak for themselves. The Defamation is clear as can be. The only likely appeal will be on Quantum (the size of the award).
Meanwhile, Trump will bluster, harrumph, and play for time. He may get away with that because, unlike most civilised countries, I am unaware of any US rule preventing a Bankrupt (or even someone in Prison) standing for President. In the UK, couldn't even stand as an MP.
Lawyers in most countries are restricted in what they can say.
Back in the day, if a Client asked me to do something which I did not like, on the assumption I could not dissuade them, I had 2 options. Do what I was told, or quit acting for them. Like most Lawyers, I have done both at different times...
PS. Most of Trump's legal team quit immediately before the start of this case. Would be wrong of me to speculate as to why
Comments
It's hard to find on Google, so here's what you need to know about E. Jean Carroll, most of which was deemed "inadmissible" by the judge:
- She couldn't recall the date, month, season, or year the incident happened
- She never told anyone about it, despite being publicly obsessed with her own sexuality
- The dress she claims to have been wearing didn't exist at the time
- Her description of the dressing room at Bergdorf Goodman was inaccurate, making her sequence of events impossible
- Her lawsuit was bankrolled by Jeffrey Epstein pal and Democrat (and Nikki Haley) mega-donor Reid Hoffman
- Democrats created a law (The Adult Survivors Act in 2022) to enable her lawsuit to proceed
- Her accusation is the exact plotline of an episode of Law & Order (one of her "favorite shows")
- Trump's Apprentice was also one of her favorite shows
- She has a history of falsely accusing men of r*pe, including Les Moonves
- She told Anderson Cooper, "most people think of r*pe as being sexy. Think of the fantasies."
- She made a career promoting promiscuity, even writing glowingly of sexual assault and naming her cat Vagina
Wait till this news gets out.
Trump wont have to pay anything.
It was a defamation case, and wasnt about any sexual assault.
The verdict was decided by the jury, rather than the judge.
Maybe he just ought to keep his mouth shut, and his opinions to himself.
That would save him a lot of money.
Settling the case would have also saved him a fortune, but he is too stupid to do that.
He could have settled the case for 10 million.
Remind again who is the certified nut job?
Jurors heard closing arguments in the case earlier on Friday, with Ms Carroll's lawyer telling them that Trump should pay "dearly" for defaming her.
A separate jury ordered Trump to pay Ms Carroll $5m (£3.9m) last year after finding him liable of sexually abusing her in a Bergdorf Goodman department store in New York in the mid-1990s. They also found him liable of defaming her after she wrote about the incident.
The trial that ended today focused only on what damages the former US president would have to pay for defaming her.
The amount is considerably more than the $10m (£7.9m) Ms Carroll had been seeking.
"We all have to follow the law," Ms Kaplan said. "Donald Trump, however, acts as if these rules and laws just don't apply to him."
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/donald-trump-must-pay-e-214400906.html
- She has a history of falsely accusing men of r*pe, including Les Moonves.
I did a 'Hard to find Google search' on Les Moonves.
The story by Ronan Farrow cites six women with allegations against Moonves that date from the 1980s to the 2000s.
The actress and writer Illeana Douglas told Farrow that Moonves assaulted her during a business meeting
"In a millisecond, he's got one arm over me, pinning me," Douglas said. "What it feels like to have someone hold you down – you can't breathe, you can't move," she said. Douglas told Farrow that Moonves was "violently kissing" her, and then, "aroused, pulled up her skirt and began to thrust against her."
Another Nutjob?
On December 18, 2018, CBS announced that the board would deny Moonves his $120 million severance pay, as their investigation had found Moonves violated his contract. According to investigators, claims made by the women were credible and led to more claims that were found to be credible during the course of the investigation.
....more nutjobs?
Weird how to like to defend rapists and serial sex offenders.
Where's the speedy trial for those?
It's a political hit job.
The names of dozens of people connected to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein were made public with the release of court documents. Who are they?
Public figures including Prince Andrew and former US President Bill Clinton are among the associates, friends and alleged victims named in the 900 pages unsealed on the order of a judge in New York.
Both the former US president and the British royal deny any knowledge of Epstein's crimes.
Many names in the documents are mentioned in passing as part of various legal proceedings, and their inclusion does not suggest wrongdoing related to Epstein.
They contain no major new allegations about Epstein nor revelations about his associates.
Epstein took his own life in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial. His friend and former girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell is serving 20 years in prison for child sex trafficking.
Who is now named in the documents?
Bill Clinton
The former US president is mentioned a number of times but there is no suggestion of any criminality.
Johanna Sjoberg, one of Prince Andrew's accusers, testified that Epstein told her that Mr Clinton "likes them young, referring to girls".
Another woman, Virginia Giuffre, who brought the lawsuit at the heart of these court documents, also mentions the American politician several times.
Although she makes no allegations against Mr Clinton, she was trying to get him to testify under oath about his relationship with Epstein, describing him as a "key person".
She had previously said Mr Clinton visited Mr Epstein's private island but in the court documents both Maxwell and Epstein dispute this. There is also no record in pilot logs of Mr Clinton going there.
Mr Clinton himself has said he flew on Epstein's plane four times, including twice to Africa, because they worked together on humanitarian projects.
But those meetings took place before the financier came under investigation, he said, and he had no knowledge of his crimes.
Donald Trump
The document also includes testimony about Donald Trump from Ms Sjoberg about a diversion Epstein's plane made to New Jersey to visit the businessman in 2001 at one of his casinos.
When pilots said their plane could not land in New York and would need to stop in Atlantic City, Epstein said he would call up Trump and drop by to see him, she said.
The documents contain no alleged wrongdoing by Mr Trump.
Ms Sjoberg is asked whether she ever gave Mr Trump a massage and she said she did not.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-67861498
"Let me ruin the suspense for everyone. Trump doesn't have an appeal," he said on Friday. "I know the talking heads on TV (who have never tried a case or appealed a jury verdict) have to mention it. Here's why it isn't going to fly."
Manookian went on to say that, in order to have a meritorious case on appeal, "you have to preserve a reversible error at the trial level."
"This is why you hire competent counsel. You need someone who actually knows the rules of evidence and procedure. Alina Habba had no clue what was occurring throughout the trial," he added. "She not only failed to preserve any remote grounds for appeal, like a moron, she repeatedly and unintentionally waived them over and over."
He went on to include an example of Habba bungling the potential for a reversal.
"For example, she kept saying 'no objection' as exhibits were entered into evidence. It appeared to me that she was saying that because she that's something she had heard real lawyers say before," he said Friday. "Unfortunately for Mr. Trump, what she was doing over and over was waiving his ability to appeal over those evidentiary issues. Because she is a moron who would rather *play* lawyer than do the research to *be* a lawyer."
Manookian then concluded: "There's no appeal here. And because people have asked me in the past, no, there is no such thing as an incompetent counsel defense in civil cases. That's for criminal matters. Take this verdict to the bank."
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/there-s-no-appeal-here-lawyer-shows-how-alina-habba-dashed-trump-s-hope-of-nixing-award/ar-BB1hmN3z?ocid=msedgntp&pc=NMTS&cvid=798154e487474a44b3c97510b1be55c9&ei=25
I would be slow to believe anything that man says. Firstly, he is qualified in a totally different State (Tennessee). Secondly, he has a long and colourful history, being permanently at war with just about everybody, particularly his State Ethical Board. He has been suspended twice, and is facing possible disbarment at present.
Trump's lawyer has more facts than an outsider. And has to run with what her client tells her which, again, an outsider does not know what that is. So to call her a "moron" is just poor.
Trump has a long history of blaming all around him for his own errors. The facts are very simple in this case.
He declined to appear in person in a civil trial in relation to the alleged sexual assault. So he lost that case. He then declared to millions that the victim was a liar, too ugly for him to sexually assault her, all the usual stuff. And declared the Court system is corrupt. The Court he was too scared, or too foolish, to attend when it mattered.
He is the man who put the genital in congenital idiot
He is restricting his comments to 1 particular appeal. He starts by saying Trump's Lawyer has been Negligent, and that is no basis for an appeal.
I am not qualified in the particular State in question (neither is Manookian), but in most national/state laws, you cannot appeal a Civil (as opposed to Criminal) decision just because your Lawyer gets things wrong. For 2 reasons-firstly, in Civil Law that is irrelevant, and because it is always open to the Client to sue their Lawyer.
Is it possible to appeal the decision on other grounds? I doubt it, but I don't know for sure. And Manookian fails to mention that at all.
The problem Trump will face on liability is clear. The facts speak for themselves. The Defamation is clear as can be. The only likely appeal will be on Quantum (the size of the award).
Meanwhile, Trump will bluster, harrumph, and play for time. He may get away with that because, unlike most civilised countries, I am unaware of any US rule preventing a Bankrupt (or even someone in Prison) standing for President. In the UK, couldn't even stand as an MP.
It's a struggle to understand why Trump, given his murky history with women, hired Ms Habba.
Back in the day, if a Client asked me to do something which I did not like, on the assumption I could not dissuade them, I had 2 options. Do what I was told, or quit acting for them. Like most Lawyers, I have done both at different times...
PS. Most of Trump's legal team quit immediately before the start of this case. Would be wrong of me to speculate as to why
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/01/uh-oh-trumps-legal-team-reveals-shocking-conflict/