rape

nsacpi

Expects Yuge Games
On Wednesday, a federal judge confirmed that a jury ruled that the former President of the United States was a rapist.

Earlier this year, Donald Trump requested a new trial or reduced damages after a jury found him liable for sexual abuse and defamation of writer E. Jean Carroll, and awarded her $5 million. Trump’s legal team argued that since the jury did not find him liable for raping Carroll, the verdict was “grossly excessive.” But U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan slapped down that argument.

“The finding that Carroll failed to prove that she was ‘raped’ within the meaning of the New York Penal Law does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape,’” Kaplan wrote. The judge explained that New York’s legal definition of the term is “far narrower” than the word “rape” is understood in “common modern parlance.”

“Indeed,” he added, “as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”

Kaplan's ruling was unambiguous and blunt. “Mr. Trump’s attempt to minimize the sexual abuse finding as perhaps resting on nothing more than groping of Ms. Carroll’s breasts through her clothing is frivolous,” he wrote. “The proof convincingly established, and the jury implicitly found, that Mr. Trump deliberately and forcibly penetrated Ms. Carroll’s vagina with his fingers, causing immediate pain and long lasting emotional and psychological harm.”

Lest you glossed over that, the judge declared there was “ample, arguably overwhelming evidence” that Trump is a rapist by the word’s most common definitions, and even “some federal and state criminal statutes.” This wasn’t “locker room talk,” this was an actual sexual assault committed by one of the most powerful men in America.

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc...ll-rape-charge-republican-reactions-rcna95585
 
"Lest you glossed over that, the judge declared there was “ample, arguably overwhelming evidence” that Trump is a rapist by the word’s most common definitions, and even “some federal and state criminal statutes.” This wasn’t “locker room talk,” this was an actual sexual assault committed by one of the most powerful men in America."

I would love to see the overwhelming evidence. lol
 
A jury clearly thought he was guilty of rape, that little semantic detail notwithstanding.
 
May 9, 2023

The jury did not find that the preponderance of evidence showed that he shoved his penis into her vagina without her consent (the statutory definition of rape) but did find that he shoved his fingers up her vagina without her consent (sexual assault). As the judge explained he raped her by the understanding of the word that most of us have. And as the judge further notes the evidence was overwhelming, including testimony by women with whom the victim discussed the assault shortly after it happened. The evidence was more than convincing for both judge and jury.
 
Last edited:
Heresy works for a biased jury. But like Russian collusion there was zero actual evidence.
 
Back
Top