Trump Guilty of Sexual Abuse.

[F1fan]

The amount of harm that he can do is far less, especially after the finding of the court. Too bad that he cannot be fined for being a pig headed idiot.

Right. So she could request some sort of court order that every time Trump slurs her he has to pay $100,000. A court fined Trump before as they refused to hand over documents in discovery. I think it was $50,000 a day.

 

[fantome profane]

It may not work the second time around since he has lost all credibility;

hmm. I think that goes to damages, not liability. But if for example some of his rabid insane maga morons start harrassing her because of something he said, then maybe.

Also if he keeps doing this it might harm his chances of a successful appeal.

 

[Revoltingest]

FYI: The verdict includes that Trump was not liable for raping Caroll.
It is easy for Never Trumpers to overlook this, because they really only care that Trump pay and they don't much care how or why.

I didn't get that impression from them.
They recognize that he was found liable for sexual assault & defamation.

The jury didn't believe that she was raped. Their verdict was unanimous.

But it seems the MAGAs have no problem with
Trump committing sexual assault & defamation.

 

[Subduction Zone]

hmm. I think that goes to damages, not liability. But if for example some of his rabid insane maga morons start harrassing her because of something he said, then maybe.

Also if he keeps doing this it might harm his chances of a successful appeal.

Then by all means let him continue to open his yap.

 

[Copernicus]

FYI: The verdict includes that Trump was not liable for raping Caroll.
It is easy for Never Trumpers to overlook this, because they really only care that Trump pay and they don't much care how or why.

I doubt that the Never Trumpers will feel that a jury not finding Trump liable for rape is a ringing victory for the man. They found him liable for sexual abuse and completely vindicated the plaintiff. However, the Always Trumpers will tend to see the lack of a rape conviction as an exoneration. That's a complete misunderstanding of the verdict.

The jury didn't believe that she was raped. Their verdict was unanimous.

This is false. Everyone on the jury could have believed that Trump raped her, and I'm sure that some did. What they didn't find was a preponderance of evidence to corroborate the charge of rape. That's very different from not believing she was raped.

 

[We Never Know]

Jury finds Donald Trump sexually abused E. Jean Carroll in civil case

A Manhattan federal jury found that Donald Trump sexually abused E. Jean Carroll in a luxury department store dressing room in the spring of 1996 and awarded her $5 million for battery and defamation.

www.cnn.com

Not surprised.

E. Jean Carroll's lawsuit has prevailed and found Trump guilty of sexual abuse and fro defamation. The decision was unanimous.

Has anyone wondered what his wife Melania thinks about him being found guilty?

 

[Estro Felino]

Has anyone wondered what his wife Melania thinks about him being found guilty?

Honestly...if I were Melania...I would think: "It's impossible that my husband, some years before marrying me (a goddess) was interested in 53 year old women...who don't look exactly like Miss America "
That's what I would think.

 

[Callisto]

Has anyone wondered what his wife Melania thinks about him being found guilty?

I'm assuming much like this ...

 

[RestlessSoul]

In a just world he wouldn't have been President, a businessman or a celebrity.

Nor in any society that hadn’t completely lost it’s moral compass

 

[Estro Felino]

I need to be blunt.
What I found astounding is that Trump was accused of a crime whose law of discipline entered into force more than twenty-five years later after the alleged events took place.

One of the principles of our Penal Law is nullum crimen sine lege: that is, nobody shall be punished on the basis of a law that entered into force after the alleged act was committed.
Article 2 of Italian Penal Code.

So I find abhorrent that they made a law just to punish Trump. Adult Survivors Act - Wikipedia
I find abhorrent that something like that is doable in the USA.

 

[Callisto]

I need to be blunt.
What I found astounding is that Trump was accused of a crime whose law of discipline entered into force more than twenty-five years later after the alleged events took place.

One of the principles of our Penal Law is nullum crimen sine lege: that is, nobody shall be punished on the basis of a law that entered into force after the alleged act was committed.
Article 2 of Italian Penal Code.

So I find abhorrent that they made a law just to punish Trump. Adult Survivors Act - Wikipedia
I find abhorrent that something like that is doable in the USA.

Well, thankfully neither Italian law nor your dubious perspective have any weight here. Someone isn't rendered not guilty due to the passage of time. Furthermore, if that orange windbag ever learned to keep his fat mouth shut he could have sidestepped the matter indefinitely. It's his incessant blathering and slander that made his past crime come to the foreground with his recent act of defamation.

And given the corruption and political conflicts rampant in Italy's judicial system, you have no room to criticize another legal system.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I need to be blunt.
What I found astounding is that Trump was accused of a crime whose law of discipline entered into force more than twenty-five years later after the alleged events took place.

One of the principles of our Penal Law is nullum crimen sine lege: that is, nobody shall be punished on the basis of a law that entered into force after the alleged act was committed.
Article 2 of Italian Penal Code.

So I find abhorrent that they made a law just to punish Trump. Adult Survivors Act - Wikipedia
I find abhorrent that something like that is doable in the USA.

I would say that it is abhorrent that there was a statute of limitation on the crime to start with, They partially corrected a small oversight. People loke Trump where a victim was afraid to report the crime against them when it happened now have some small means of justice.

 

[Estro Felino]

Well, thankfully neither Italian law nor your dubious perspective have any weight here. Someone isn't rendered not guilty due to the passage of time. Furthermore, if that orange windbag ever learned to keep his fat mouth shut he could have sidestepped the matter indefinitely. It's his incessant blathering and slander that made his past crime come to the foreground with his recent act of defamation.

And given the corruption and political conflicts rampant in Italy's judicial system, you have no room to criticize another legal system.

We don't have a racialized justice that targets the heterosexual WASP.
In my country OJ Simpson would have never been acquitted: there was the motive, the footprints, the suicide note, the attempted escape.

 

[Estro Felino]

I would say that it is abhorrent that there was a statute of limitation on the crime to start with, They partially corrected a small oversight. People loke Trump where a victim was afraid to report the crime against them when it happened now have some small means of justice.

Honestly what torments me is that the facts were not proven beyond any reasonable doubt.
There's not even a date of the events.
It happened someday ...in 1996...
wow...

Let's say she recalls the exact day...
Trump could have proved he was in London that day. Or in LA.

The fact that no specific day has been provided...well...it's very convenient.
It prevents the defendant from defending themselves.

 

[Heyo]

It may not work the second time around since he has lost all credibility;

You mean he could use the Tucker Carlson defense?

 

[Callisto]

We don't have a racialized justice that targets the heterosexual WASP.

Neither do we. It would be a good idea to stop opining on things that a) you make clear at every turn you know nothing about and b) are your own skewed notions rather than fact.

In my country OJ Simpson would have never been acquitted: there was the motive, the footprints, the suicide note, the attempted escape.

Like no one in your country was who was guilty was acquitted thanks to the rich, political corruption and organized crime? You have no higher ground to stand on. None. Your courts are no strangers to letting the guilty walk or convicting an innocent. I'll see your OJ and raise you an Amanda Knox, who, btw, is "a heterosexual WASP".

Enough said.

 

[Estro Felino]

. I'll see your OJ and raise you an Amanda Knox, who, btw, is "a heterosexual WASP".

Enough said.

In the Knox case, one of my peers was unjustly accused too, an Italian named Raffaele Sollecito. And an Italian is not a WASP.
So...what I saw was a very unfair trial where two young people were accused based upon a prosecutor's conjecture.

The same prosecutor has been sanctioned by the Italian Superior Council of Magistrates.
Besides, neither Knox nor Sollecito had the motive. There was no evidence they participated to the crime.

 

[Estro Felino]

Like no one in your country was who was guilty was acquitted thanks to the rich, political corruption and organized crime?

No.
Riina and Cutolo died in jail of old age. They were the two mafia bosses and another has been jailed last January too.
What I hate about my country is that there is no death penalty.

Because that's what they deserve...these mobsters.

 

[exchemist]

Well truth be told it is a poll.

I'm just hoping for someone with a high IQ whom can think this country out of the mess its In.

The obvious starting point for any decent president would be not to work at dividing people to set them at each other's throats.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Has anyone wondered what his wife Melania thinks about him being found guilty?

She's a trophy wife -- she's not there to "think," and she knows it.
She also knows that if she turns on him, the best she can hope for is a plane ticket back to Slovenia.