• Friendly reminder: The politics section is a place where a lot of differing opinions are raised. You may not like what you read here but it is someone's opinion. As long as the debate is respectful you are free to debate freely. Also, the views and opinions expressed by forum members may not necessarily reflect those of GBAtemp. Messages that the staff consider offensive or inflammatory may be removed in line with existing forum terms and conditions.

Judge clarifies: Yes, Trump was found to have raped E. Jean Carroll

Status
Not open for further replies.

supermist

Well-Known Member
OP
Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2009
Messages
1,084
Trophies
2
Location
Wisconsin
XP
3,901
Country
United States
Last edited by supermist,

Windaga

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2009
Messages
1,189
Trophies
1
Age
35
Location
New England
XP
2,765
Country
United States
For anyone that doesn't have access to the site;

After Donald Trump was found liable for sexually abusing and defaming E. Jean Carroll, his legal team and his defenders lodged a frequent talking point.

Despite Carroll’s claims that Trump had raped her, they noted, the jury stopped short of saying he committed that particular offense. Instead, jurors opted for a second option: sexual abuse.

“This was a rape claim, this was a rape case all along, and the jury rejected that — made other findings,” his lawyer, Joe Tacopina, said outside the courthouse.

A judge has now clarified that this is basically a legal distinction without a real-world difference. He says that what the jury found Trump did was in fact rape, as commonly understood.

The filing from Judge Lewis A. Kaplan came as Trump’s attorneys have sought a new trial and have argued that the jury’s $5 million verdict against Trump in the civil suit was excessive. The reason, they argue, is that sexual abuse could be as limited as the “groping” of a victim’s breasts.

Kaplan roundly rejected Trump’s motion Tuesday, calling that argument “entirely unpersuasive.”

“The finding that Ms. Carroll failed to prove that she was ‘raped’ within the meaning of the New York Penal Law does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape,’ ” Kaplan wrote.

He added: “Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”

Kaplan said New York’s legal definition of “rape” is “far narrower” than the word is understood in “common modern parlance.”

The former requires forcible, unconsented-to penetration with one’s penis. But he said that the conduct the jury effectively found Trump liable for — forced digital penetration — meets a more common definition of rape. He cited definitions offered by the American Psychological Association and the Justice Department, which in 2012 expanded its definition of rape to include penetration “with any body part or object.”

Kaplan also flatly rejected the Trump team’s suggestion that the conduct Trump was found liable for might have been as limited as groping of the breasts.

The reason? Trump was not accused of that, so the only alleged offense that would have qualified as “sexual abuse” was forced digital penetration. Beyond that, Trump was accused of putting his mouth on Carroll’s mouth and pulling down her tights, which Kaplan noted were not treated as alleged sexual abuse at trial.

“The jury’s finding of sexual abuse therefore necessarily implies that it found that Mr. Trump forcibly penetrated her vagina,” Kaplan wrote, calling it the “only remaining conclusion.”

Kaplan also noted that the verdict form did not ask the jury to decide exactly what conduct Trump had committed, and that neither prosecutors nor Trump’s lawyers had requested it to do so.

“Mr. Trump’s attempt to minimize the sexual abuse finding as perhaps resting on nothing more than groping of Ms. Carroll’s breasts through her clothing is frivolous,” Kaplan wrote.

He added that the jury clearly found that Trump had “ ‘raped’ her in the sense of that term broader than the New York Penal Law definition.”

The motion was a part of Trump’s efforts to appeal the verdict against him. That’s an effort that will apparently continue as he faces a separate defamation lawsuit from Carroll, dealing with claims Trump made about her allegations while he was still president.

But for now, Trump’s effort to push back has led to a rather remarkable clarification that severely undercuts his main talking point.
 

AdenTheThird

The Apathetical Atheist
Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2018
Messages
1,041
Trophies
1
Location
Pacific Ocean
XP
2,301
Country
United States
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/19/trump-carroll-judge-rape/

This is specifically for the mod who took it upon themselves to close my two threads and state I was editorializing the title.

Except I wasn't, because a judge has clarified Trump is a rapist.

If you have an issue with that, it's a you problem and you do a disservice censoring in this way.
I'd argue that there's still a distinction here. The judge may have determined that Trump committed rape, but strictly speaking, he wasn't convicted of rape so he's not a convicted rapist, per se. That could be where the alleged editorializing came from.

Not to minimize Trump's actions, of course. As the article states, New York's definition of rape is much narrower than the general definition. Trump was found liable for what most people would consider rape, but wasn't convicted for it due to an odd interpretation of the word. So, while personally and socially thinking that Trump raped Carroll is fine (and even, to a degree, justified), claiming that he was legally convicted of rape isn't accurate.

It's important to keep legal and social terms distinct and separated, because it goes both ways. Trump will (and has) absolutely taken every chance he has to minimize his actions by muddling social and legal definitions of terms together. Only by separating them again can one see the case facts as they are.

Thank you @Windaga for the article rip. Paywalled news articles are a nuisance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Foxi4

supermist

Well-Known Member
OP
Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2009
Messages
1,084
Trophies
2
Location
Wisconsin
XP
3,901
Country
United States
It's important to clarify that due to the statute of limitations, he could not be tried in a criminal court. If there were no statute of limitations on sexual assault he very likely would be in prison for what he did.

Basically, a judge has clarified that Trump is a rapist therefore it's not incorrect to refer to him as one going forward.
Post automatically merged:

I dunno what's funny about rape but Hillary Clinton was correct to call the MAGAs a basket of deplorables. It's being demonstrated in this thread.
 
Last edited by supermist,
Status
Not open for further replies.

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
    K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2: Lol rappers still promoting crypto