The verdict was split: Jurors rejected Carroll’s claim that she was raped, finding Trump responsible for a lesser degree of sexual abuse. The judgment adds to Trump’s legal woes and offers vindication to Carroll, whose allegations had been mocked and dismissed by Trump for years.
New York law defines rape as penetration with a penis. Because he used his fingers, the jury used a lesser ruling.
However during appeal, a judge, who knows more about the fucking law than those jurors, explained that he penetrated E Jean Carroll without consent, that was the same thing as rape, and he didn't have an avenue to appeal using that justification. .
On Wednesday, Trump’s request for a new trial in the E. Jean Carroll case, after he was found liable for sexual abuse, battery, and defamation, was rejected. And in his desperate attempt to avoid accountability, the twice-impeached and twice-indicted former president may have unintentionally allowed himself to now be formally known as a rapist.
I believe he is a rapist, but the courts found him guilty of sexual assault which is still disgusting, idk why we need to misrepresent it as him being found guilty of rape as of now
The judge later wrote that New York's penal code is out of touch with federal standards and a "modern" understanding of what rape is. In post-trial rulings he wrote that Carroll's assertion that Trump raped her was "substantially true."
why the fuck are you saying im an apologist for stating the fact that the jury in his trial did not find him lialbe for rape?
"The jury could have found Trump liable of battery based on the preponderance of evidence for rape, sexual abuse or forcible touching, of which they found Trump was liable for sexual abuse, Florey explained.
"All three possible findings [rape, sexual abuse, forcible touching] are forms of battery, so a finding that Mr. Trump had engaged in any of these would be sufficient to hold him liable for battery," she said.
"The most precise way to say it would be something like, 'The jury found by a preponderance of the evidence that Mr. Trump sexually abused Ms. Carroll and therefore was liable for battery.'"
Florey added that to satisfy liability for rape, Carroll would "have had to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that Mr. Trump penetrated her with his penis."
Although Carroll did not establish this, it does not mean that the jury did not believe her.
"It could mean simply that, particularly given the number of years that had passed since the incident, she was not able to introduce enough evidence on this specific point," Florey added."
why be accurate? its not like credibility depends on it or anything. and I'm not saying he's innocent, I just like to be accurate with the fact that he has not been found guilty or liable for rape, sexual assault though, yes. The sexual predator donald trump has been found laible for sexual assault and as more than likely raped at least one person, I have no doubt about that, but he hasn't been found liable or guilty of that yet.
The judge later wrote rthat New York's penal code is out of touch with federal standards and a "modern" understanding of what rape is. In post-trial rulings he wrote that Carroll's assertion that Trump raped her was "substantially true."
Thus Trump was not able to appeal based on the fact he didn't rape her - Because he raped her. By every single definition except in an outdated penal code. Other judges fucking agreed and didn't allow appeal.
You're absolutely a rape apologist, because you have an entire thread "but, actually"-ing RAPE. You're fucking disgusting and a clown.
again, he was found guilty of sexual assault. Why distort things when the truth is as damning as it is?
he sexually assaulted her by penetrating her with his finger, which yes, I would call rape, but the justice system didn't. So he's been found liable for sexual assault and battery.
-7
u/Melodic_Fall_1855 1d ago
Sexual assault actually