Gotcha, fat guy

Quote: Tanko

It was a Manhattan jury. Unless you live here, you can never understand.

You still don't get it. The dressing rooms in that upscale department store for women's clothing, are guarded by a female monitor who directs shoppers to the next available dressing room. There is no way in hell she would allow any man to get past her and enter the fitting rooms.

You believe that's never gone a moment unguarded in all these years? A dressing room guard?

I can't even find someone at the cash register sometimes in clothing stores.

Quote: Tanko

It was a Manhattan jury. Unless you live here, you can never understand.

Wasn’t the jury pool selected from all over the state?

And wasn’t one of the jury members a Tim Pool fan?

Quote: rxwine

I would tend to give someone who has no previous history of assault more leeway than someone who shows up on the radar for the same thing multiple times. So it would be nice to know the history. Of course, there are also horrible failures, where you let someone go and they do even worse stuff the next time or murder someone.

From a logic perspective, if a guy keeps ending up in a situation where we assume he keeps getting into situations where a predatory woman keeps trying to take him down, I'm going to also think he's stupid. Even if something is not your fault you're an idiot if you didn't do something different or at least point out how you tried to protect yourself from the same thing even if it failed. I would be convinced if someone told me they did what they could to prevent all these unfair accusations. Not so impressed, if someone just keeps saying he runs into terrible people who lie about him multiple times and accuse them of crimes.

I'm also willing to put someone completely incompetent who needs to be off the street somewhere where he won't hurt anyone if that's the case if there's evidence for that, without necessarily making him pay criminal type penalties.

I mean, sure, but you can't---for example---take a rapist convicted with undeniable proof and then decide he must have also been responsible for every rape in a tri-state area for the last ten years. I guess it would make investigations much easier, technically. The civil case is about whether or not the incident that Plaintiff alleges, specifically, happened.

Granted, Trump's own words would go a long way to pointing me in that direction on a, 'Preponderance of the evidence' (more likely than not) standard, which is why I just need the two of them to be in the same place and that will satisfy me.

On the contrary, and to your point, Trump's own words hurt him in this one. This is precisely why attorneys tell you not to talk until such time as you have to or it might actually be beneficial for you. Whether or not the event itself happened, Trump most definitely brought the defamation aspect of the complaint upon himself. That's also not because he denied it; he's allowed to publicly deny it; it's because Trump said that Carroll was only making the claim for the purpose of selling copies of her book.

Point is, my personal requirement for preponderance would be that they either be in the same place at the same time demonstrably, or, I might even be willing to go as far as accepting it if the complaint were in any way specific, but it wasn't. It offered a specific place and an event that even the complaint admits required highly unusual circumstances, but no date? No month? Come on.

Quote: Gandler

Juries don't find people innocent, it is guilty or not guilty. (And, in a civil case this is not even the terminology). But, if the jury was convinced that he was never there that day he would have not been liable for battery. And, he would not have been liable for defamation (because he would have been saying the truth).

If Trump could have easily proved that he was never there, it would not be an issue.

It is not a secret that Trump is a sex fiend, I don't think even he would deny this. So the idea of him coming onto a lady in a dressing room is not even remotely far-fetched. Of course, like Trump said he could shoot somebody in public and his supporters would still worship him, so it does not really matter in a political context. But, it is good for another victim to get justice (though good luck collecting from him, he is notorious for not paying legal debts).

I take EvenBob's point.

If the jury couldn't find that Trump committed rape on a civil preponderance standard, then that indicates that a criminal charge based on the same subject matter and allegations wouldn't have a snowball's chance in Hell. Not only did Trump not rape her beyond the shadow of a doubt; the two of them were never in the same place during the nine month period that the civil complaint indicates beyond a shadow of a doubt.

How the hell is Trump supposed to prove that he was never at a store that is located near Trump Tower in a nine month period!? Read the complaint that I linked; here, I will quote it:

Quote:

TRUMP RAPES CARROLL AT BERGDORF GOODMAN 18. One evening between the fall of 1995 and the spring of 1996, Carroll left work and went to Bergdorf Goodman, the luxury department store on Fifth Avenue in New York City. She was and remains a regular shopper at Bergdorf’s.

The Fall of 1995 to the Spring of 1996; by my reckoning, that's nine months. In what world can Trump, 'Easily prove,' that he was never at a store within a one minute walk of Trump Tower on no evening in a nine month period?

I know you hate Trump; I also hate Trump, but try to be at least minimally objective about what you're asking for.

Anyway, the question is not whether or not he has come on to a woman in a forcible and inappropriate context ever in his entire life; the question is whether or not he came onto this specific woman in this specific location. I'm sorry, but you're going to have to do a little better than simply making a 25+ year old claim that is impossible to prove wrong, even in theory.

I don't even know that I strictly need proof that the two were in the same place. I could maybe get there just by Plaintiff making a claim that is reasonably falsifiable, but she didn't do that. A nine month window? You got raped and you don't remember what year or season it was? Your two friends don't remember, either?

I mean, I could tell you every month/year start/end date for every job I've ever had in my entire life, but a journalist can't remember the year that she supposedly got raped?

The jury found for the Plaintiff because they wanted to find for the Plaintiff. Were this anyone but Trump, the precedent would terrify me, especially if this had been a criminal case.

I also want to be clear that I am not saying the event didn't happen; I think it's quite possible that it did.

The problem is, even by the civil standard, I have to get to greater than 50% and I just can't get there.

Working against Trump are his words and other accounts of him.

Working against the Plaintiff is the Plaintiff's own complaint and the fact that Plaintiff requires me to accept that she, as a journalist, cannot remember...and that neither of her two friends, one of whom is another journalist, remember, WHAT YEAR Plaintiff was raped in.

I hope this isn't seen as a blaming the victim sort of thing, but seriously, raise your hand if you don't know what year you graduated. Raise your hand if you can't remember the year in which you were married, if that applies to you. Raise your hand on divorce, if that applies. First child being born?

Two people whose occupation literally entails the creating and keeping of records of things and the Plaintiff can't give me a year in which this event allegedly happened?

Pick a date. Any date. As long as Trump was in New York on that date and with whereabouts that otherwise could not specifically be accounted for...I can find my way to 50.1%.

Quote: Tanko

It was a Manhattan jury. Unless you live here, you can never understand.

You still don't get it. The dressing rooms in that upscale department store for women's clothing, are guarded by a female monitor who directs shoppers to the next available dressing room. There is no way in hell she would allow any man to get past her and enter the fitting rooms.

Did you read the testimony from the store workers at the time?

Quote: Mission146

I mean, I could tell you every month/year start/end date for every job I've ever had in my entire life, but a journalist can't remember the year that she supposedly got raped?

The jury found for the Plaintiff because they wanted to find for the Plaintiff. Were this anyone but Trump, the precedent would terrify me, especially if this had been a criminal case.

I can see that, though I know in a very agitated state one can become very out of body. I can walk along for a mile still focus on some recent thought or conversation without even noticing my surroundings if I am really caught up in something. Lots of emotional trauma probably amplifies that 10 fold for the next couple hours.

When my brother died, I completely forgot I had jury duty 2 days later. Something I would never do normally. I had to call in a give my excuse later. Right now I couldn't tell you what year my brother died. I didn't fix it in my memory. I'd have to go look it up. Until this moment, I didn't even realize I never actually fixed that date in my memory. Maybe I didn't want to.

Should it be burned in my memory? Apparently, it's not. Yet I can still tell you a girlfriend's birthday 30 years ago. March 9.

Haven't seen that one in 20 years, btw.

Quote: Mission146

I take EvenBob's point.

If the jury couldn't find that Trump committed rape on a civil preponderance standard, then that indicates that a criminal charge based on the same subject matter and allegations wouldn't have a snowball's chance in Hell. Not only did Trump not rape her beyond the shadow of a doubt; the two of them were never in the same place during the nine month period that the civil complaint indicates beyond a shadow of a doubt.

How the hell is Trump supposed to prove that he was never at a store that is located near Trump Tower in a nine month period!? Read the complaint that I linked; here, I will quote it:



The Fall of 1995 to the Spring of 1996; by my reckoning, that's nine months. In what world can Trump, 'Easily prove,' that he was never at a store within a one minute walk of Trump Tower on no evening in a nine month period?

I know you hate Trump; I also hate Trump, but try to be at least minimally objective about what you're asking for.

Anyway, the question is not whether or not he has come on to a woman in a forcible and inappropriate context ever in his entire life; the question is whether or not he came onto this specific woman in this specific location. I'm sorry, but you're going to have to do a little better than simply making a 25+ year old claim that is impossible to prove wrong, even in theory.

I don't even know that I strictly need proof that the two were in the same place. I could maybe get there just by Plaintiff making a claim that is reasonably falsifiable, but she didn't do that. A nine month window? You got raped and you don't remember what year or season it was? Your two friends don't remember, either?

You essentially made my point. The plaintiff has the prove it is likley by the preponderance of the evidence, and the jury feels that she did (on two of the claims). With all of the witnesses (including store workers from the time and people she confessed to at the time), clearly they think it likley that Trump touched her in improper ways.

So clearly she established that Trump was there. And, with his history of comments regarding changing rooms, this is not surprising.

My guess is rape is tricky, because (varies by State and not going to pretend I know NY's defintion), you have to prove there was certain acts and certain kinds of penetration to be considered rape.

I think I am being objective by agreeing with an impartial jury. I did not make a claim on this matter before a verdict was reached, because frankly until very recently I did not even know about this.

But, yes I do hate Trump, but I think I am also fair to him (I have made many posts about positive decisions he made). But, you can only say so many positive things about one of the most unlikable people in history.

Quote: rxwine

I can see that, though I know in a very agitated state one can become very out of body. I can walk along for a mile still focus on some recent thought or conversation without even noticing my surroundings if I am really caught up in something. Lots of emotional trauma probably amplifies that 10 fold for the next couple hours.

When my brother died, I completely forgot I had jury duty 2 days later. Something I would never do normally. I had to call in a give my excuse later. Right now I couldn't tell you what year my brother died. I didn't fix it in my memory. I'd have to go look it up. Until this moment, I didn't even realize I never actually fixed that date in my memory. Maybe I didn't want to.

Should it be burned in my memory? Apparently, it's not. Yet I can still tell you a girlfriend's birthday 30 years ago. March 9.

Haven't seen that one in 20 years, btw.

That's true, but that's what the friend is for. Even if Plaintiff had asked the first friend to get mum on it, don't you think the first friend would document it in some coded way that nobody except for her would know what the code means? The friend could journalize it in such a way that doesn't specifically refer to anything while knowing what the journal entry means, now you have a specific date and, arguably, evidence for that date.

We have two friends. The first friend was supposedly called within minutes of the incident-no record made. The second friend was called several days after the incident. Neither of these two friends can even give a YEAR!?

Your brother's death is very unfortunate and I can buy into the argument that one might want to put the event out of memory. That said, the complaint would indicate that the Plaintiff does remember highly specific aspects of the alleged encounter---aspects that could never be proven or disproven---some of which are completely irrelevant---but no year?

I'm not even saying that's curious. I'm not saying I suspect the Plaintiff of deliberately lying. I'm saying I don't know and am nowhere close to knowing. Now I have to guess. In order for me to guess in Plaintiff's favor, I have to think it's 50.1%+ true and there's just no way I can do that.

An accomplished writer gave tremendous detail of a specific event that happened 25+ years ago. A retelling of this event immediately after, and shortly after, the event to two different friends. Yet nobody involved can give a year or thought to somehow note the year?

I know it was a long time ago. That's why there's typically a statute of limitations for these sorts of things. Not in every case, but cases like this, statute of limitations exist to protect the accused from unprovable claims, or worse, claims that can't be proven wrong.