Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
Wow. He can't help himself. I guess he WANTS to get sued again.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Trump Slams His Attorneys Then Spends 45 Minutes Defaming E. Jean Carrol AGAIN, and Her Witnesses.
- Thread starter Wandering Monk
- Start date
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Trump has the right to speak his mind in this country weather one wants to believe it or not.
Argentbear
Well-Known Member
The right to speak ones mind doesn't include slander
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
He has a mind?
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I think people have a tough time defining what slander is especially when they have a bias target that they absolutely hate.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
"She was not the chosen one." So, you WOULD sexually assault someone if she was attractive enough, you freak?
Do you know the expression "it's her word against his"?
You need to provide with evidence...especially if you just say the year and not the day of the month.
I can also say that in 1998 I was raped by Leonardo Di Caprio...but I don't recall the exact day...it was Summer.
You need to provide with evidence...especially if you just say the year and not the day of the month.
I can also say that in 1998 I was raped by Leonardo Di Caprio...but I don't recall the exact day...it was Summer.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
The jury thought there was enough evidence. Do you have access to information that they did not have?
Does that mean I am supposed to believe her?
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
Do you have access to information that they did not have?
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
No, that is irrelevant as he was convicted by a jury.
Argentbear
Well-Known Member
the legal definition of slander is the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation. That definition doens't change just because of who the perpetrator of slander is.
McBell
Unbound
Seems as though he is gonna need an even bigger hit to his purse...
Do you answer a question with a question?
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
Already done in a court room.
You've already tried this one before.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
You're the one who answered a question with a question.
McBell
Unbound
And those he slander have the right to sue over his spoken words.
trump already lost a lot of money over speaking his mind about E. Jean Carrol.
Apparently it has not cost him enough as of yet.
McBell
Unbound
The court that found him guilty did not have a tough time of it....
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
There are such things as bias courts you know.
McBell
Unbound
Trump has already lost in court over this.
Apparently he has not lost enough money over it.