Fogbow

I went with hung jury, mostly because he always skates. I'm hoping for something else.

Fiascoist wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 11:31 am I voted for "one dollar" cuz reasons.
Big one being compromise by the jurors so they can get out of there and be the firstish to find a publisher and get their dough or go on network TV and sell the story. A defense verdict sells only to a small audience while any sort of fault verdict get money in the pocket. Plus tfg will appeal, appeal and appeal some more keeping it in the headlines. A defense verdict is gone tomorrow with yesterday's news and while only mentioned at rallies.

One of these fine days, a jury is going to hire an agent before they even come out of the room, and they'll give the agent authority to negotiate a deal where the whole jury goes on Live Tee Vee and talks about the case for a lot of money. That's where we're heading, and you obviously sense that.

And as to the trial, I think I would have nibbled around the edges of the plaintiff and gone after the "vanity" issue. The line that pissed her off, something to the effect of "she's not my type" which she heard as "ugly".

I heard it as "ugly". He meant it as "ugly".

If those witnesses are believed, then maybe a big verdict. At least I hope so. He needs some comeuppance in this life.

My wife keeps saying, if she's lying, why? What would motivate someone to go through this?

But I will let others address your other comments, I gotta go mow.

sterngard friegen wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 12:58 pm Since the trial is not being broadcast, we only know what we know (or think we know) from the media. And a few things that leaked out yesterday were in my view very unfavorable to the plaintiff.


I am not sanguine about the result. Do I think she's telling the truth? I don't know. And she has the burden of proof.

We need to prepare ourselves that Teflon Don may skate again. I hope not. I hope Trump's lawyer has thoroughly pissed off the jury (like he has Judge Kaplan). But don't count on it.

The facts listed by Stern, as well as others, that don't fit the stereotype of how a "real" rape victim should behave were generally known and covered before trial. The stereotype is wrong and unfair, see, e.g., https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/01/opin ... trial.html?, but its impact on juries is significant. Ms. Carroll's case has always been high-risk, and is certainly not a sure thing.

That said, a lot of things have gone right for Ms. Carroll at trial. Her direct examination addressed the stereotype issues forthrightly. She stuck to her guns under the argumentative and lengthy cross-examination, and was repeatedly able, in effect, to address the stereotype and why it shouldn't be applied to her.

Unlike Stern, I'm not so bothered by shopping at Bergdorf or watching The Apprentice. She's in the entertainment business and part of its NY social life.

But I certainly agree that we should not be counting any chickens.

The psychologist's take from today on watching the Apprentice (because her NY social set all watched it, and it would have been noticeable if she had not) and shopping at BG (she didn't want to blame the store; she wanted to take control of her actions) square with simple psychological theory, although of course they are not dispositive.

As others have said, her behaviors after the rape are textbook. Avoiding sex is textbook + a reason for massive damages (if I were on the jury).

p0rtia wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 10:48 am
Ehem *Joe Biden* ehem.

Biden tried to play down the middle. It was not his best moment. I found Arlen Specter and Alan Simpson to be particularly disgusting in the confirmation hearing.

Sadly, #MeToo was fading out as a movement well before abortion took major precedence again due to the Dobbs decision leak.

p0rtia wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 12:03 pm The psychologist's take from today on watching the Apprentice (because her NY social set all watched it, and it would have been noticeable if she had not) and shopping at BG (she didn't want to blame the store; she wanted to take control of her actions) square with simple psychological theory, although of course they are not dispositive.

As others have said, her behaviors after the rape are textbook. Avoiding sex is textbook + a reason for massive damages (if I were on the jury).

I agree with that. Earlier when I said she had a damages problem with respect to defamation, I meant to say she has a potential causation problem. That is, arguably, his defamatory statements didn’t cause her to get fire; her own actions did. (if the jury buys that, that is)

p0rtia wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 2:12 pm Not sure this is what you're asking, Ben, but the E. Jean Caroll case is preponderance of the evidence. Must be unanimous.

Where I was trying to go with it was the idea that a criminal defense requires a smaller crack in the victim/witness plausibility than a civil defense, so Joey Bag'o'Tacos being a big jerk has a better chance of payoff when all he has to do is plant a little reasonable doubt. When he has to make her LESS believable than the alternative, however, it's a bad choice.

Ben-Prime wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 1:27 pm

p0rtia wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 2:12 pm Not sure this is what you're asking, Ben, but the E. Jean Caroll case is preponderance of the evidence. Must be unanimous.

Where I was trying to go with it was the idea that a criminal defense requires a smaller crack in the victim/witness plausibility than a civil defense, so Joey Bag'o'Tacos being a big jerk has a better chance of payoff when all he has to do is plant a little reasonable doubt. When he has to make her LESS believable than the alternative, however, it's a bad choice.

Ah, I see. I think. Though I think the difference in that case would be between Federal (unanimous) and State (majority), yes/no? I may be misremembering, but I think I heard one of the t-heads say that it would have been majority vote (and televised) in State court. Hoping someone will correct me, as I am definitely NAL.

Curiously the early reports on the first day of Taco's cross of Caroll were that he was in fact being gentle with her and non-confrontational--or at least trying to be. That initial reaction was swiftly buried in a wave of Taco condemnation. But honestly, I think it's true--that he is TRYING to be respectful--it's just not in his nature as a bully to come off as anything but a bully.

I can think of a lot of much more awful things he might have said. Though to be sure, the objections are swift, and the judge is not giving him an inch!

Day 6 coverage by ICP (they discuss some of the things discussed here):




Judge continues not to be impressed.

Inner City Press @innercitypress 3h
Seigel: In her book she says, I rarely thought of this. This is inconsistent with what she told you, right?
Lebowitz: No.
Seigel: I direct your attention to line 26 --
Judge Kaplan: Here is an objection.
Carroll's lawyer: The quote must go further.
Seigel: OK
Judge Kaplan: Mr. Seigel, you're going to have to get thing together. This has been going on for 7 days.
Seigal: Dr Lebowitz, do you see --
Judge Kaplan: Just read it! We all know she can read it. I don't know what you are doing. Just get with it
***
Inner City Press @innercitypress 1h
Tacopina: They proposed putting in the Billy Bush tape, or the -
Judge Kaplan: We all know what you're talking about.
Tacopina: They shouldn't play it twice.
Judge Kaplan: You don't contest that it is authentic, do you? I consider only serious objections.

Adam Klasfeld (for me, he's not threading as well as usual):



They complement each other well. I was 99% certain that they've been releasing trial transcripts each day, swore I saw day 1, but can't find them now. Not on the docket. Maybe just dreamed it, but it would be helpful to see the actual language vs. the reporters having to type quickly.

Wonder why trump’s witness can’t make it. Hide the ketchup.

Slim Cognito wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 3:24 pm Wonder why trump’s witness can’t make it. Hide the ketchup.

"Health issues."

Slim Cognito wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 3:24 pm Wonder why trump’s witness can’t make it. Hide the ketchup.

An unexpected case of professionalism.

So, if they don't have any witnesses, all they have is the trump lawyers questions and his summing up to the Jury?

Gosh.

Why are you in Ireland instead of at your trial in NY?

“Because we’ve had a long standing agreement to come here .. and I hear we’re doing very well in NY.”

Does Ireland have an extradition treaty with America?

Kendra wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 7:07 pm

Why are you in Ireland instead of at your trial in NY?

“Because we’ve had a long standing agreement to come here .. and I hear we’re doing very well in NY.”

TFG's message is, "I don't care. Do you?"

And I kind of get it. I don't think this matters much to him. If he wins, he wins and is either out just his attorney's fees, or he tries to retaliate and sue Carroll for damages. If he loses, he appeals and delays paying any judgement for at least a couple years and likely longer. During which time things could change (like someone dying). I don't think the negative stigma of losing a rape and defamation civil suit will bother him much.

When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.

somerset wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 7:20 pm TFG's message is, "I don't care. Do you?"

And I kind of get it. I don't think this matters much to him. If he wins, he wins and is either out just his attorney's fees, or he tries to retaliate and sue Carroll for damages. If he loses, he appeals and delays paying any judgement for at least a couple years and likely longer. During which time things could change (like someone dying). I don't think the negative stigma of losing a rape and defamation civil suit will bother him much.

Exactly. And it won't bother his voters either.

I think he is not there because he fears losing and in Manhattan. Not being there is an FY to New York.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-04/ ... /102301076

Donald Trump denies raping writer E. Jean Carroll in a deposition video that has been played for a jury in a civil trial where the former US president is seeking to defend himself without testifying in person.

Key points:
The alleged rape took place in the dressing room of a New York City department store
In a video played to the jury, Donald Trump calls the allegation a "ridiculous, disgusting story"
Mr Trump's legal team says it will not call any witnesses
Warning: This story contains graphic details of alleged rape and sexual assault.

Mr Trump, the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, said in the October 2022 deposition that the alleged rape in the dressing room of the Bergdorf Goodman department store in New York City decades ago did not happen.

"It's the most ridiculous, disgusting story," Mr Trump says in the video, hunched over a conference table as Ms Carroll's lawyers present documents to him. "It's just made up."

Although the deposition footage was not released, portions of the transcript have been filed publicly.

Mr Trump will not be testifying in person. His legal team told US District Judge Lewis Kaplan on Wednesday it would not call any witnesses.

somerset wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 7:20 pm TFG's message is, "I don't care. Do you?"

And I kind of get it. I don't think this matters much to him. If he wins, he wins and is either out just his attorney's fees, or he tries to retaliate and sue Carroll for damages. If he loses, he appeals and delays paying any judgement for at least a couple years and likely longer. During which time things could change (like someone dying). I don't think the negative stigma of losing a rape and defamation civil suit will bother him much.

Oh you still dont understand him and the Narcissist. This is just like those that said he Impeachments "didn't matter to him"

Of course it matters to him. If it didn't he would be in Florida laughing to his fans about it. he could be in the courtroom showing his defiance. But instead he is cowering on the other side of the Atlantic. He HATES this. he HATES that he is forced to make a deposition. about it. he hates that this person this little shit, is putting a STAIN on his record, a stain that every historian till the end of History will be able to see.

His legacy is tainted by this. People in the future will see that he couldn't stop this. His desperate delaying tactics didn't work. That he was too weak. He couldn't scare her away. THAT HE WAS A LOSER. HE COULDN'T GET AWAY WITH THIS. People will be able top see his badness. If they let celebrities get away with stuff like this, and HE is getting dragged into court, HE CANT BE A CELEBRITY!

Loser. Loser. Loser.

I mean look at the photo on that twitter video. It looks like his insides have been ripped out.

He says “confront”, not “testify”. Looks like he wants to cause a scene.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politic ... 78788.html

Trump cutting Ireland trip short to ‘confront’ accuser in New York case

Former US president Donald Trump has said he is cutting his trip to Ireland short so he can return to “confront” his accuser in a New York civil rape case, which he described as a “political attack”.

Mr Trump said he would “probably attend” the hearing as he spoke to reporters while golfing at his resort outside the village of Doonbeg, Co Clare.

His visit to Scotland and Ireland has coincided with the second week of a civil trial in Manhattan over accusations, denied by Mr Trump, that he raped former magazine columnist E Jean Carroll in a department store dressing room in 1996.

Mr Trump said he has been “falsely accused”.

“I’m going back to New York. I was falsely accused by this woman, I have no idea who she is – it’s ridiculous,” he said.

AFAIK his counsel has already told the court that he will not testify, so all he might be able to do is sit in the audience. And even that might not fly, depending on circumstances..

edit: I guess he has to be able to sit at the table..

If New Yorkers let him get anywhere near the courthouse.