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

[Dave from down under]

[Kendra]

Thread:

BACK TO CARROLL: If you thought Trump couldn't stoop lower than asking the jurors to be told he's excused from attending trial because he's so worried about burdening our fair city, think again. And it involves his apparent plan to use evidence of Carroll's sexual history. 1/

[chancery]

If there were real logistical problems, the Secret Service would have intervened. It didn't.

[chancery]

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .119.0.pdf

Carroll's opposition to Trump's motion for an excuse not to attend the trial:

Your Honor has directed the parties to advise whether they intend to be present throughout
the trial. Ms. Carroll has made clear that she will attend the entire trial and will testify under oath before a jury of her peers. In contrast, Mr. Trump has yet to answer the Court’s question, and he now asks the Court to deliver an excuse to the jury in the event he decides not to attend trial.

Mr. Trump’s motion is frivolous. Mr. Trump will soon stand trial in federal court for sexual assault and defamation. These are extremely serious claims—and he has the right to appear at trial and testify under oath in his own defense. In the alternative, he has the right to decline to appear at trial, and to accept any associated consequences. Given the gravity of the allegations at issue in this case, one might expect Mr. Trump to appear in person. But he is obviously free to choose otherwise. Either way, Ms. Carroll has a right to play Donald Trump’s deposition at trial under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 32(a)(3), so she has no need for him to testify live.

However, the notion that Mr. Trump would not appear as some sort of favor to the City of New York—and that the jury should be instructed as much—“taxes the credulity of the credulous.” Maryland v. King, 569 U.S. 435, 466, 133 S. Ct. 1958, 1980 (2013) (Scalia, J., dissenting). Some of the most important and high-profile cases in our Nation’s history have been tried in the Southern District of New York. See, e.g., United States v. Al Fawwaz, No. 98 Cr. 1023 (Kaplan, J.); United States v. Ghaith, No. 98 Cr. 1023 (Kaplan, J.). This Court and the City it calls home are fully equipped to handle any logistical burdens that may result from Mr. Trump’s appearance at a weeklong trial. Indeed, the Court has already made clear that it takes those matters seriously. If Mr. Trump decides not to appear at his own trial for sexual assault and defamation, the jury may draw whatever inferences it chooses—and Mr. Trump has no right to a judicial endorsement of his (flimsy) excuse. See, e.g., Kostelec v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 64 F.3d 1220, 1229 (8th Cir. 1995) (“[T]here may be comment on the failure of a party to call an available witness whose testimony the party would naturally be expected to produce if favorable to him.”); Finch v. Covil Corp., 388 F. Supp. 3d 593, 616 (M.D.N.C. 2019) (“It is proper for a party in a civil case to suggest inferences, based in evidence, from the failure of an adversary to present witnesses under its control.”).

Mr. Trump’s position is especially difficult to credit in light of his own recent activity. Over the past few weeks, Mr. Trump attended the Ultimate Fighting Championship 287 event,1 spoke at the National Rifle Association’s annual meeting,2 and appeared for a deposition in the New York Attorney General’s civil case against Mr. Trump, his adult children, and the Trump Organization.3 On Monday, he announced that he has scheduled a New Hampshire campaign event for next Thursday, April 27—in other words, in the middle of the trial in this case. 4 If Mr. Trump can find a way to attend wrestling championships, political conventions, civil depositions, and campaign functions, then surely he could surmount the logistics of attending his own federal trial.

[Kendra]

JUST IN: Judge presiding over next week's civil trial between Trump and E. Jean Carroll is not buying Trump's claim he wants to spare NYC the resources / arrangements of his presence.

Judge Kaplan says he's confident the Secret Service/city can handle it. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 25.0_1.pdf

[Volkonski]

Good.

[p0rtia]

"Alleged desire to testify at trial."

Go Judge Kaplan!

Joe Taco's obviously deceitful media appearances and filings on behalf of Chump have lowered the bar for me in terms of the worse representation I have ever seen in a federal case.

[Kendra]

Thread.

p.s. While Trump was ordered to tell Judge Kaplan today whether he intends to attend part or all of the Carroll trial, he won’t give the judge a straight answer. (And if you’re not a lawyer, let me translate: That’s not going to go over well. At all.)

[Gregg]

Is that letterhead for a legal firm or a fast food place?

[sugar magnolia]

Is that letterhead for a legal firm or a fast food place?

Vistaprint template for a landscaper.

[chancery]

Is that letterhead for a legal firm or a fast food place?

Vistaprint template for a landscaper.

Sugar, I lerve your posts.

[SuzieC]

Every time I see a new post in this topic I expect to hear that the case has settled. After being on pins and needles for the Dominion v. Fox case that's what I expect. Don't settle, Ms. Carroll.

[sugar magnolia]

Is that letterhead for a legal firm or a fast food place?

Vistaprint template for a landscaper.

Sugar, I lerve your posts.

It's mutual!

[Flatpoint High]

Is that letterhead for a legal firm or a fast food place?

Vistaprint template for a landscaper.

what??? not Canva?

[chancery]

https://twitter.com/MuellerSheWrote/sta ... 021352963

Mueller, She Wrote
@MuellerSheWrote

BREAKING: ORDER from the 2nd circuit in E Jean Carroll I. This is the case where they’re trying to decide whether Donald was acting within his role as president when he defamed E Jean during that press conference. I’ll break this down in layman’s terms. 1/
11:08 AM · Apr 21, 2023


A long time ago, Barr’ DOJ said “you can’t sue him for shit he says when he’s president, so we are filing to substitute ourselves in for Donald (the Westfall Act says we can) because he was just doing president stuff when he defamed E Jean.” 2/

udge Kaplan DENIED that DoJ motion to substitute (which would effectively end the case, by the way.) DoJ APPEALED to the 2nd circuit court of appeals. 2nd circuit VACATED judge Kaplan’s ruling and sent the question over to the DC Circuit where it sat for a LONG time. 3/

The 2nd circuit sent it to DC because this has to do with DC laws and presidents and stuff, and because it’s a REALLY important question. Last week, DC said “this isn’t for us to decide. It’s up to the FACTFINDER. 4/

Basically - there needs to be further proceedings to determine whether h was acting within the scope of his job because we’re not gonna say that ALL government officials are ALWAYS acting within the scope of their jobs when they give press conferences. 5/

That kicked it back to the 2nd circuit, and that’s where we are today. The 2nd circuit says “Since we vacated the OG Kaplan decision, and DC wants Kaplan to figure it out, we REMAND it back to Kaplan.” 6/

I *think* this means that it’s now up to the judge who originally decided that trump can’t be subbed by DoJ because he wasn’t acting within the scope of his employment. Which means Carol I could go forward. Carol II starts April 25th. What do I think will happen? 7/

Either Kaplan decides Donald wasn’t acting within the scope of his job and consolidates Carroll I and Carroll II to both begin April 25th. OR, perhaps the parties decide that Carroll I is kind of moot because Donald REPEATED his demotion AFTER he left office (Carroll II). 8/

Here’s the full filing. It’s really well written and easy to understand. Give it a read. END/

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... 2opn042123

[Ben-Prime]

Is that letterhead for a legal firm or a fast food place?

Vistaprint template for a landscaper.

Four Seasonings Legal Services

[Volkonski]

Rape lawsuit trial puts spotlight back on Trump and women

https://apnews.com/article/trump-carrol ... 46ca87e1e4

Former President Donald Trump’s behavior toward women, long a source of flashpoints in his political career, now faces a new level of scrutiny: a trial in a lawsuit accusing him of rape.

Jury selection is set to start Tuesday in the case filed by former advice columnist E. Jean Carroll, who says Trump raped her in a luxury New York department store dressing room in the 1990s.

Trump, who is unlikely to attend the trial, has called the accusations “a complete con job.” Carroll, who is seeking unspecified damages, casts the case as a #MeToo-inspired quest for accountability from the epitome of prominent men.

“I’m filing this lawsuit not just for myself but for every woman in America who has been grabbed, groped, harassed, sexually assaulted and has spoken up and still has been disgraced, shamed or fired,” Carroll said early on.

The lawsuit is putting Trump’s history with women under a microscope as he runs to return to the White House. But if a trial over a rape accusation would be a crisis for most candidates, with Trump, it remains to be seen.

[somerset]

Rape lawsuit trial puts spotlight back on Trump and women

https://apnews.com/article/trump-carrol ... 46ca87e1e4

Former President Donald Trump’s behavior toward women, long a source of flashpoints in his political career, now faces a new level of scrutiny: a trial in a lawsuit accusing him of rape.

Jury selection is set to start Tuesday in the case filed by former advice columnist E. Jean Carroll, who says Trump raped her in a luxury New York department store dressing room in the 1990s.

Trump, who is unlikely to attend the trial, has called the accusations “a complete con job.” Carroll, who is seeking unspecified damages, casts the case as a #MeToo-inspired quest for accountability from the epitome of prominent men.

“I’m filing this lawsuit not just for myself but for every woman in America who has been grabbed, groped, harassed, sexually assaulted and has spoken up and still has been disgraced, shamed or fired,” Carroll said early on.

The lawsuit is putting Trump’s history with women under a microscope as he runs to return to the White House. But if a trial over a rape accusation would be a crisis for most candidates, it's a badge of honor for Trump and his supporters.. with Trump, it remains to be seen.

FIFT

[RTH10260]

If there were real logistical problems, the Secret Service would have intervened. It didn't.

He lost the election, he is no longer a concern to the Secret Service as to protecting a POTUS. He is just a citizen with certain privileges.

[northland10]

If there were real logistical problems, the Secret Service would have intervened. It didn't.

He lost the election, he is no longer a concern to the Secret Service as to protecting a POTUS. He is just a citizen with certain privileges.

All past presidents receive secret service protection, though I assume scaled back from the sitting POTUS protection. Therefore, everywhere he goes is a concern is the Secret Service. They also impose limitations such as a past president may not drive a vehicle on public roads (I assume this is so if a situation comes up the driver is has special driving skills).

[pipistrelle]

If there were real logistical problems, the Secret Service would have intervened. It didn't.

He lost the election, he is no longer a concern to the Secret Service as to protecting a POTUS. He is just a citizen with certain privileges.

Agents of the supposedly proudly apolitical Secret Service decorated their desks with MAGA crap, so I'm betting some of them are super loyal like the rest of the cult.

[sterngard friegen]

Is that letterhead for a legal firm or a fast food place?

The design was stolen from another lawfirm, Quinn, Emanuel, although the latter's colors are not quite as garish:

https://abovethelaw.com/2023/03/donald- ... nuel-logo/

[Kendra]

Thread:

NEW: Joe Tacopina has a new request in the E. Jean Carroll case, again trying to revisit an issue Judge Lew Kaplan has already decided. The subject? Whether Trump's forced kissing of another woman after pushing her against a wall is enough to warrant her testimony. 1/

[p0rtia]

MeidasTouch lawyers say Joe Taco is intentionally trying to rile the judge to create opportunities for mistrial. Not sure if they meant mistrial would be due to Judge being so annoyed he's make some error, or if the idea is to behave so badly (like bringing up topics the judge has said are not coming in) that judge will offer mistrial to EJ Caroll's team.

Both seem unlikely to me, although they were both mentioned at some point, so maybe it's something else.

Anyway, the point is that they think Joe Taco is being an ass in the hope of gaining some advantage.

I first became aware of Joe Taco a dozen years ago when he was representing Joran van der Sloot. He was a scuzzbag then, too. It wasn't just his lies, it was the uber heavy-handed denial of the facts of the case. And of course, coming across as a dumb fuck. But I assume that is intentional, to keep people from wanting to be in the same room with him, where they might be able to point out his awfulness.

[SuzieC]

They will lose this last minute untimely motion. How desperate is Trump?