Gotcha, fat guy

Quote: Mission146

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.

Quote: Gandler

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: Mission146

Is, "Proof/Prove," a word you have ever attempted to use before?

The Plaintiff can't PROVE anything. The complaint cannot even identify a specific year.

Where is the testimony of the employees? I'd be interested in reading that. Did any actually see Trump and Carroll in the store at the same time? Evidently, Carroll states that she and Trump have only been physically in the same place twice and this alleged incident was the second of two occasions.

If the employees say they've seen Trump and Carroll in there separately a bunch, well yeah, I can't explain Carroll being there, but the store is located within one minute of Trump Tower. It wouldn't surprise me that Trump shops there from time to time.

So, what's established? That Trump was at a store within one minute of Trump Tower at some point in a nine month period? Yeah, no shizz. I'm also at stores located within one mile of me (none are within a minute walking, of me) a lot of the time, as well.

I think rape is tricky because you'd have to make a potentially falsifiable claim in the first place. "Yeah, he raped me within one minute of where he lives at some point in a nine month period. It was also more than a quarter of a century ago."

Yeah, that's going to be a little, 'Tricky,' to demonstrate.

Of course, it would be quite possible to demonstrate its opposite if some more specific claim were being made with respect to timeframe.

Simply put, if this complaint were false, then it was written in such a way as to take almost zero risks.

An impartial and anonymous jury, sure you are. It's totally objective to find complaints more than 50% likely when those complaints are not even theoretically disprovable. Do you understand that? The complaint was made in such a safe way as to not be disprovable, even in theory.

Quote: kenarman

How come there was only 9 jurors at the Trump trial?

Quote: Gandler

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