BREAKING: Trump found liable by New York civil jury to E. Jean Carroll

Must read

This is a breaking story, so the 24-hour rule applies: All reports within the first 24 hours are suspect. But we will strive to give you the most accurate information.

Update: New commentary and tweets added.

Our headline is intentionally vague because multiple reports are saying it is a mixed verdict. For instance, this is what the New York Times says:

The announcement on Fox lines up with this claim:

We haven’t followed the trial closely, so we aren’t sure if a jury could rationally believe that Ms. Carroll was sexually abused and touched without her consent by Mr. Trump, but not raped, but that is evidently the verdict.

Trump has already reacted to the news over on TruthSocial:

(The screenshot is true and accurate.)

We are not attempting to gather every comment on the story at this time, but Joel Pollack had this to say:

This decision seems especially dubious under the Federal Rules of Evidence:

And Clay Travis had this:

Dude… ‘chick?’ Really? Not a good time to roll out that term. His second try was better:

Naturally, the fact Trump didn’t testify probably hurt him.

We will update this story as it develops.

Update: Since our initial post, we have found a few additional items of interest.

A few people are spreading this clip around this afternoon:

Please note, however, that she is not saying she believes rape is sexy. Listen to it for yourself. Rather she said she thinks other people think it is, which is in our opinion a strange take. You can judge for yourself if she disagrees with those people she is talking about.

Next, we have this comment:

However, it sounds like Trump was accused of the common law offense of ‘battery.’ In the common law, a battery can be the slightest non-consensual touch as long as it is intentional and it is offensive in nature.

Another item worth noting:

This is almost certainly given to the jury after the verdict was rendered. Still, as a window into the judge’s thinking, that is amazing.

Next, this tweet gives us a chance to deal with another misconception:

No, this is not a conviction for anything. This is a civil verdict. The legal standard for most questions in civil suit is much lower than in criminal cases. In the ordinary criminal case, the state needs proof beyond a reasonable doubt—not beyond all doubt, but beyond any reasonable one. By comparison, in a civil suit, the standard is more likely than not (and in the case of a tie, the defendant wins). The reason for this difference is that a criminal case often puts a person’s life and liberty at stake. The most famous example to illustrate this is the O.J. Simpson cases. Simpson was accused of murdering Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. In the criminal case, he was found not guilty, but in the civil suit he was found liable for both of their deaths. This was logically consistent—a rational person can feel that Simpson probably killed them, but there was still a reasonable doubt.

Finally, it appears that Trump is going to attempt to appeal:

As we said before, stay tuned.


Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Twitchy’s conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join Twitchy VIP and use the promo code SAVEAMERICA to get 40% off your VIP membership!

Source link

- Advertisement -spot_img

More articles


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

- Advertisement -spot_img

Latest article