Falsehoods Unchallenged Only Fester and Grow
https://thefogbow.com/forum/
chancery wrote: ↑Thu Jun 29, 2023 10:28 pm
He also rules, in a careful and strongly developed section, not without an undertone of relish, why Trump has waived this defense by not raising it earlier in the litigation, and why it would be extremely unfair to Carroll to allow Trump to amend his answer three years after he initially filed it.
I mean, we all know that relish will lead to ketchup.Tiredretiredlawyer wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:35 amchancery wrote: ↑Thu Jun 29, 2023 10:28 pm
He also rules, in a careful and strongly developed section, not without an undertone of relish, why Trump has waived this defense by not raising it earlier in the litigation, and why it would be extremely unfair to Carroll to allow Trump to amend his answer three years after he initially filed it.
Ben-Prime wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 3:08 pmI mean, we all know that relish will lead to ketchup.Tiredretiredlawyer wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:35 amchancery wrote: ↑Thu Jun 29, 2023 10:28 pm
He also rules, in a careful and strongly developed section, not without an undertone of relish, why Trump has waived this defense by not raising it earlier in the litigation, and why it would be extremely unfair to Carroll to allow Trump to amend his answer three years after he initially filed it.
@ZoeTillman
NEW: DOJ says it will no longer certify that Trump was acting w/in scope of his office as president when he made allegedly defamatory remarks about E. Jean Carroll, meaning no absolute immunity as a federal employee -- major turn of events, more to come assets.bwbx.io/documents/user…
"I didn't Rape her (I won that at trial)"
I gotta say, it takes a certain kind of chutzpah to claim "victory" on a rape charge because one's wee-wee is so small that the woman couldn't tell the difference between his wee finger and his wee mushroom
somerset wrote: ↑Wed Jul 12, 2023 11:05 amI gotta say, it takes a certain kind of chutzpah to claim "victory" on a rape charge because one's wee-wee is so small that the woman couldn't tell the difference between his wee finger and his wee mushroom
Especially when tfg is famous for having really tiny fingers/hands!somerset wrote: ↑Wed Jul 12, 2023 11:05 amI gotta say, it takes a certain kind of chutzpah to claim "victory" on a rape charge because one's wee-wee is so small that the woman couldn't tell the difference between his wee finger and his wee mushroom
So there's no likelihood that the dress and expert DNA testimony will play a part in the next trial.chancery wrote: ↑Sun Apr 30, 2023 2:03 pm The recent posts on the DNA issue don't reflect its complexities, including that Trump made a squirrelly 11th hour conditional offer to provide DNA evidence, an offer with strings attached that would have likely delayed the trial for at least six months.
The whole story is laid out in Judge Kaplan's 21 page memorandum opinion rejecting Trump's proposal.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 5.56.0.pdf
Of particular note is this on p. 20
Nor is it clear that injecting a DNA issue into the case at this late date would be likely to produce any important evidence for several reasons.
First, even if there were a "match" between Mr. Trump's DNA sample and the mixture of DNA recovered on Ms. Carroll's dress, that would tend only to show that there was some encounter between Mr. Trump and Ms. Carroll on at least one occasion when she wore that dress. But it would not prove or disprove Ms. Carroll's rape allegation. [As the court noted earlier in the opinion, while DNA was recovered, no markers for semen were recovered.]
Second, even if a DNA analysis were to determine that Mr. Trump could be eliminated as a potential contributor to the mixture of DNA found on Ms. Carroll's dress, the probative value of such a determination would be very far from conclusive. It would not disprove Ms. Carroll's accusation. The alleged rape could have occurred without a sufficient quantity or quality of Mr. Trump's DNA to have remained on the dress since the mid 1990s.
Third, it is possible that the results of further DNA analysis using Mr. Trump's DNA sample would be entirely inconclusive.
E. Jean Carroll compares Trump’s defamation claim to something ‘by a writer at the Onion,’ asks judge to dismiss
MARISA SARNOFF
Jul 11th, 2023, 6:16 pm Updated Jul 11th, 2023, 7:09 pm
The New York writer who successfully sued Donald Trump for sexual abuse and defamation says that his latest claim — that it was he, in fact, who was defamed by the victim of his assault — should be dismissed.
In June, just weeks after a unanimous jury awarded $5 million to writer E. Jean Carroll, Trump countersued, alleging that Carroll’s continued insistence that he raped her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in the 1990s amounted to defamation. He specifically pointed to a statement she made in a May 10 interview on CNN in which, when asked about the jury’s finding that he didn’t rape her, she said: “Oh yes he did,” Carroll said. “Oh yes, he did.”
On Tuesday, Carroll, through her attorney Roberta Kaplan, filed a motion to dismiss.
Her motion describes Trump’s defamation allegation as something akin to satire:
Carroll’s motion provides additional key context to Carroll’s “yes he did” comment, explaining that she was telling the CNN interviewer what she was thinking at the time the jury made its finding to the contrary.Trump’s “tit for tat” counterclaim is nothing more than his latest effort to spin his loss at trial. Trump alleges that Carroll defamed him and caused him “inordinate” harm by implying in a post-trial interview that when he sexually assaulted her, he not only used his fingers, but also his penis. While that might read like an article penned by Andy Borowitz in the New Yorker or by a writer at the Onion, it’s actually the theory of the counterclaim that Trump now purports to assert in this action. But here in federal court, where logic and reason rather than satire prevail, it is clear that Trump’s new counterclaim for defamation should be dismissed with prejudice.
https://lawandcrime.com/trump/e-jean-ca ... o-dismiss/
The only thing that will ever shut him up is the Grim Reaper. NADT.raison de arizona wrote: ↑Wed Jul 12, 2023 6:02 pmNarrator: But there was nothing, not anything, that could shut him up.