E. Jean Carroll v. Donald J. Trump and United States of America (poll added!)

[Sam the Centipede]

[ words on the Golden Rule and ineffective counsel ]

Thanks chancery I have noticed that you appear to know a little about the law!

Srsly, I and others appreciate when excellent Fogbar lawyers explain, analyze or evaluate for us hoi polloi. And of course the court reporting by RC and others

[noblepa]

I wonder if Trump will pay Habba? Perhaps he'll give her a bunch of trading cards, a few leftover Trump Steaks and an honorary doctorate of Trump University?

Trump is finding out that lawyer-wise "you get what you don't pay for."

Isn't the opportunity to bask in the presence of the bestest President evah payment enough?

Seriously, it has been reported that his PAC paid her law firm several million already.

[pipistrelle]

I wonder if Trump will pay Habba? Perhaps he'll give her a bunch of trading cards, a few leftover Trump Steaks and an honorary doctorate of Trump University?

Trump is finding out that lawyer-wise "you get what you don't pay for."

Isn't the opportunity to bask in the presence of the bestest President evah payment enough?

Seriously, it has been reported that his PAC paid her law firm several million already.

The only way a fourth-rate (or lower) attorney could make millions.

[Slim Cognito]

[ words on the Golden Rule and ineffective counsel ]

Thanks chancery I have noticed that you appear to know a little about the law!

Srsly, I and others appreciate when excellent Fogbar lawyers explain, analyze or evaluate for us hoi polloi. And of course the court reporting by RC and others

Fogbar: is that in our dictionary yet?

[Foggy]

Jeez, did it really shut him up for a while?

That's amazing. Robbie Kaplan actually made him shut up. She forced the issue.

Awesome lady.

[bob]

"Ineffective assistance of counsel" is a concept that derives from the Constitutional right to counsel in criminal proceedings. It has no application to civil actions.

There is, of course, the tort of malpractice ("professional negligence").

He could sue Habba (or, perhaps more accurately, her insurance carrier) and get a judgment that she pay him to cover what he has to pay Carroll.

But he's not going to that, for a variety of reasons.

[bob]

[Sam the Centipede]

But he's not going to that, for a variety of reasons.

Good luck to Trump in engaging an attorney for that lawsuit!

Although … if Trump succeeded in getting the suit into court and, inevitably, failed, he could then sue that second attorney for negligence squared.

[p0rtia]

I saw a tweet (or xit or whatever it's called) about the highlighted bit:

AH concludes, rebuttal by EJC attorney Crowley:

Habba: Imagine you are living your life. You have a family, a beautiful wife, and an important job to do. You're hit with an allegations. There are no facts -
Roberta Kaplan: Objection!
Judge Kaplan: Sustained.

The author of the tweet (sorry, can't find it) wrote it is basic trial law that you can't ask a jury to do put themselves in the defendant's position, or at least that's what I think the author said, it was brief and I'm no lawguy.

Is that because the jury should be assessing and evaluating on the facts as testified (or exhibited in evidence), not imagining anything?

The tweeter (or xitter?) said this was a prime example of how Habba is not a good trial lawyer. And someone (here? elsewhere?) mentioned that "ineffective assistance of counsel" is not grounds for appeal in a civil case, it's up to a civil defendant to ensure they have effective counsel who will present their argument well.

I wonder if Trump will pay Habba? Perhaps he'll give her a bunch of trading cards, a few leftover Trump Steaks and an honorary doctorate of Trump University?

Trump is finding out that lawyer-wise "you get what you don't pay for."

Jumping in rather late, but wanted to add that Inner City reported that Robbie Kaplan asked the jurors to imagine how they would feel if, like Carroll, they found themselves alone in a hotel room, reading death threats and other hate. I wondered if Habba had copied Kaplan's technique (IANAL).

[jcolvin2]

From context, the objection was not aimed at the "imagine" portion of the closing, but rather at Habba's assertion that, "There are no facts," which Trump was prohibited from contesting in light of the earlier trial.

[Volkonski]

E. Jean Carroll Lawyer Says Donald Trump Committed New Crime in Court

https://www.newsweek.com/e-jean-carroll ... rt-1864543

On Friday, Kaplan made an appearance on CNN where she discussed the verdict with host Anderson Cooper, during which time she said that that the former president, who remains the overwhelming favorite for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination, had committed perjury during the course of the second trial.

When asked about Trump's time being called as a witness for his own defense, Kaplan said that a jury needs to be able to trust a witness when they hear their testimony, something she argued Trump did not during this trial, adding that the jury saw him commit perjury on the stand.

"He lied again on the stand. He again said 'I standby everything I said in my deposition which was I did nothing to E. Jean Carroll, never met her, she's a whack job, never heard of her,'" Kaplan said. "So he not only committed perjury, but the jury themselves saw him commit perjury."

She added: "And then they watched his deposition video, where he pointed out, as everyone knows, that famous photo of him, Ivana [Trump], and E. Jean and her then-husband, and he points to E. Jean and he says, 'That's Marla Maples.' And then, my favorite part of it is once he realizes he made a mistake, he says, 'Oh, it's a blurry photo.' And I said to the jury, 'you saw the photo...it's not a blurry photo.'"

[p0rtia]

I saw a tweet (or xit or whatever it's called) about the highlighted bit:

The author of the tweet (sorry, can't find it) wrote it is basic trial law that you can't ask a jury to do put themselves in the defendant's position, or at least that's what I think the author said, it was brief and I'm no lawguy.

Is that because the jury should be assessing and evaluating on the facts as testified (or exhibited in evidence), not imagining anything?

The tweeter (or xitter?) said this was a prime example of how Habba is not a good trial lawyer. And someone (here? elsewhere?) mentioned that "ineffective assistance of counsel" is not grounds for appeal in a civil case, it's up to a civil defendant to ensure they have effective counsel who will present their argument well.

I wonder if Trump will pay Habba? Perhaps he'll give her a bunch of trading cards, a few leftover Trump Steaks and an honorary doctorate of Trump University?

Trump is finding out that lawyer-wise "you get what you don't pay for."

Jumping in rather late, but wanted to add that Inner City reported that Robbie Kaplan asked the jurors to imagine how they would feel if, like Carroll, they found themselves alone in a hotel room, reading death threats and other hate. I wondered if Habba had copied Kaplan's technique (IANAL).

From context, the objection was not aimed at the "imagine" portion of the closing, but rather at Habba's assertion that, "There are no facts," which Trump was prohibited from contesting in light of the earlier trial.

I was picking up on the Golden Rule part of the discussion.

[chancery]

There is, of course, the tort of malpractice ("professional negligence").

He could sue Habba (or, perhaps more accurately, her insurance carrier) and get a judgment that she pay him to cover what he has to pay Carroll.

But he's not going to that, for a variety of reasons.

Oh yeah. An African swallow, maybe -- but not a European swallow, that's my point.

I decided not to mention malpractice, because "ineffective assistance" is a term typically used only in a criminal context.

Besides, although the list of Habba's mistakes, blunders, howlers, lack of perceptiveness, failure to use common sense, and deliberate unlawyer-like buffoonery is certainly a long one, a malpractice claim by Trump against Habba would run into certain problems. You and I are in agreement that it's unlikely that any rational member of Trump's legal team would recommend bringing such a claim.

Also, and I've been thinking about posting on this, putting aside the lack of experience that makes her a silly choice for her current role, Habba has a few qualities which can be useful in a lawyer, including glibness, aggressiveness, and (possibly) capacity for hard work (although we don't have any way of knowing how much, if any, of the back office prep, organization, and strategy she's responsible for.)

I'm reminded (only a little, but it's a wonderful passage) of Dickens' description of Mr. Stryver in A Tale of Two Cities.

It had once been noted at the Bar, that while Mr. Stryver was a glib man, and an unscrupulous, and a ready, and a bold, he had not that faculty of extracting the essence from a heap of statements, which is among the most striking and necessary of the advocate’s accomplishments. But, a remarkable improvement came upon him as to this. The more business he got, the greater his power seemed to grow of getting at its pith and marrow; and however late at night he sat carousing with Sydney Carton, he always had his points at his fingers’ ends in the morning.

At last, it began to get about, among such as were interested in the matter, that although Sydney Carton would never be a lion, he was an amazingly good jackal, and that he rendered suit and service to Stryver in that humble capacity.

If Habba's career had taken a different path, and if she had made different kinds of choices, she might have turned into a competent sort of lawyer.

[RTH10260]

Question: when will transcripts become publically available?

[jcolvin2]

I'm reminded (only a little, but it's a wonderful passage) of Dickens' description of Mr. Stryver in A Tale of Two Cities.

It had once been noted at the Bar, that while Mr. Stryver was a glib man, and an unscrupulous, and a ready, and a bold, he had not that faculty of extracting the essence from a heap of statements, which is among the most striking and necessary of the advocate’s accomplishments. But, a remarkable improvement came upon him as to this. The more business he got, the greater his power seemed to grow of getting at its pith and marrow; and however late at night he sat carousing with Sydney Carton, he always had his points at his fingers’ ends in the morning.

At last, it began to get about, among such as were interested in the matter, that although Sydney Carton would never be a lion, he was an amazingly good jackal, and that he rendered suit and service to Stryver in that humble capacity.

If Habba's career had taken a different path, and if she had made different kinds of choices, she might have turned into a competent sort of lawyer.

Instead of an amazingly pretty jackal?

[chancery]

Question: when will transcripts become publically available?

The transcripts are available now, bring money, lots of money.

After 90 days they will be available for a nominal cost, plus they may at some point be available for a moderate cost contained in the appendix on appeal, when Trump's lawyers file it.

[Reality Check]

My take is that when Habba was moved up to the number one chair when Tacopina left she saw this as her chance for glory. She would go back and retry Carroll v Trump II and convince the jury her client did nothing wrong so he was just defending himself from false accusations. Unfortunately for her Judge Kaplan saw through that plan in about a minute. None of the legal tricks she had seen on Matlock reruns were going to work.

I think her conduct was probably worthy of sanction but I do not expect Carroll's attorneys to ask nor Judge Kaplan to act on his own either. They will let the jury verdict speak as to her bad conduct.

[realist]

Question: when will transcripts become publically available?

The transcripts are available now, bring money, lots of money.

After 90 days they will be available for a nominal cost, plus they may at some point be available for a moderate cost contained in the appendix on appeal, when Trump's lawyers file it.

[chancery]

I think her conduct was probably worthy of sanction but I do not expect Carroll's attorneys to ask nor Judge Kaplan to act on his own either. They will let the jury verdict speak as to her bad conduct.

[Foggy]

I suspect the jury didn't really increase the verdict because of her behavior. I think they gave the amount they did 1) because of the defamation, 2) because of shithead's behavior, stomping in and out of the courtroom, muttering under his breath loudly, and the other crap he tried, and 3) because they were punishing him (again) for sexually assaulting EJC in the first place. And yeah, number 3 is inappropriate from a legal standpoint, but totally appropriate from a human standpoint, and they'll never prove it happened.

[rossgw]

$20 so far!
https://www.gofundme.com/f/vtgub-donald ... legal-fund

Someone named Jimmy Burke organized it and donated the first $10.

shit I should have done this I could pay off my student loans

actually, I just reported this

Looks like it was taken down.

[much ado]

Poor Jimmy Burke.

[sad-cafe]

Someone named Jimmy Burke organized it and donated the first $10.

shit I should have done this I could pay off my student loans

actually, I just reported this

Looks like it was taken down.

Good
I reported it

[neonzx]

Nice. Maybe GoFundMe has updated their giving guidelines after the "we build the wall" insanity and nearly $30 million collected.

Perhaps Jimmy can go to GiveSendGo. They have no guardrails over there.

[poplove]

shit I should have done this I could pay off my student loans

actually, I just reported this

Looks like it was taken down.

Good
I reported it

Very good. I didn't think it would last long and I saw some tweets about similar fundraisers getting axed.