Trump Trial

[GURPS]

IT WAS A UNITED FRONT… Trump’s Legal Team Reveals Shocking ‘Conflict of Interest’ in E. Jean Carroll Case: Judge Lewis Kaplan and E. Jean Carroll’s Lawyer Roberta Kaplan Worked Together at Same Law Firm — Judge Allegedly Served as Mentor


The legal team of former President Donald Trump is set to challenge the ridiculous $83.3 million jury verdict in the defamation case brought by nutcase E. Jean Carroll.

The basis of their appeal, as revealed to The New York Post, hinges on an alleged “conflict of interest” involving Manhattan federal Judge Lewis Kaplan and Carroll’s lawyer, Roberta Kaplan.

Trump’s attorney, Alina Habba, expressed shock upon learning that both Judge Kaplan and Roberta Kaplan, who are not related, previously worked together at the same prestigious law firm in the early 1990s.

This connection was uncovered by The Post columnist Charles Gasparino, following a tip that Judge Kaplan was once a mentor to Roberta Kaplan.

According to The Post, Judge Kaplan and Roberta Kaplan were employed at Paul, Weiss, Rifkin, Wharton & Garrison in the early 1990s.

Judge Kaplan served as a partner until his appointment to the federal bench in 1994, while Roberta Kaplan worked there until 2016 before founding her own firm, Kaplan Hecker & Fink.

 

[GURPS]

Trump to Appeal E. Jean Carroll Ruling over Alleged ‘Insane’ Conflict of Interest​

“The verdict was delivered Friday by a seven-man, two-woman jury in a trial regularly attended by Trump, who abruptly left the courtroom during closing arguments by Carroll’s lawyer, only to later return,” the report added.

Over the weekend, Donald Trump’s legal team said they will appeal the ruling, with attorney Alina Habba claiming they were unaware of the fact Judge Lewis Kaplan had previously mentored E. Jean Carroll’s lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, in the 1990s. Despite similar last names, the two have no relation.

“It was never disclosed. It’s insane and so incestuous,” Habba said, alleging that the past relationship had never been disclosed.

According to the Daily Mail, the conflict-of-interest allegations erupted from an “anonymous former Weiss partner, who reportedly claimed Roberta Kaplan — a junior associate — made an extra effort to stand out to the managing partners.”

https://media.breitbart.com/media/2...habba-new-york-civil-trial-10-17-23-getty.jpg
https://media.breitbart.com/media/2023/11/Alina-Habba.jpg

 

[HemiHauler]

Trump to Appeal E. Jean Carroll Ruling over Alleged ‘Insane’ Conflict of Interest​

“The verdict was delivered Friday by a seven-man, two-woman jury in a trial regularly attended by Trump, who abruptly left the courtroom during closing arguments by Carroll’s lawyer, only to later return,” the report added.

Over the weekend, Donald Trump’s legal team said they will appeal the ruling, with attorney Alina Habba claiming they were unaware of the fact Judge Lewis Kaplan had previously mentored E. Jean Carroll’s lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, in the 1990s. Despite similar last names, the two have no relation.

“It was never disclosed. It’s insane and so incestuous,” Habba said, alleging that the past relationship had never been disclosed.

According to the Daily Mail, the conflict-of-interest allegations erupted from an “anonymous former Weiss partner, who reportedly claimed Roberta Kaplan — a junior associate — made an extra effort to stand out to the managing partners.”

https://media.breitbart.com/media/2...habba-new-york-civil-trial-10-17-23-getty.jpg
https://media.breitbart.com/media/2023/11/Alina-Habba.jpg

The best part is that the oversized porcine specimen still needs to put up the cash now. Given that he’s not very liquid means he’ll have to sell assets in order to cover his liability. I’d imagine he’s going to have to liquidate ~120mn to satisfy.

That puts a smile on my face.

Perhaps I will make an offer for a few cases of ketchup.

 

[GURPS]

The Trump-Carroll Case is Blatantly the Greatest Miscarriage of Justice in Modern American History.​

The awarding of nearly $90 million to the second-rate advice columnist E. Jean Carroll will doubtless be remembered for generations as the greatest miscarriage of justice in contemporary American history. Jean Carroll’s case was not just ludicrous on the face of it, but between the judge, the “experts” who testified, and the mechanisms by which the case even came to be, it’s impossible for any ordinary person in the West to see this as anything more than the continuation of a series of hoaxes perpetrated on former President Donald J. Trump with the desire to keep him from re-entering the Oval Office in January 2025.

THE ‘RAPE’.​

During the latest episode of this trial, Carroll admitted she wasn’t doing very well financially and needed to find a way to sell more books. The testimony appears to be the basis for the very first claim she ever made, in New York magazine’s The Cut, in the summer of 2019.

Far from a compelling claim, the 80-year-old writer initially laid out the story that her supposed rape occurred either in 1994, before altering the day to be “in the fall of 1995 or the spring of 1996.” She couldn’t remember the specifics. What she did remember was that she was wearing a “Donna Karan coatdress and high heels but not a coat.” She later refused to produce said coat for DNA testing despite admitting to still owning it, describing it as “unworn and unlaundered since that evening.” It later came to light that the coatdress was not made in 1994 or 1995.

It didn’t matter to Carroll, who has accused multiple men of sexually assaulting or raping her throughout her life, including a babysitter’s boyfriend, a dentist, a camp counselor, an unnamed college date, an unnamed boss, and CBS chief executive Les Moonves.

Carroll also appeared to remember specifics such as the emptiness of the Bergdorf Goodman department store in the early evening – a detail she called “inconceivable” – as well as admitting that it was her who wanted to sexually harrass Trump originally because she wanted a “funny story to tell” about getting the then-infamous New York City developer to put on women’s lingerie.

Upon voluntarily entering a dressing room which she claims would “usually [be] locked until a client wants to try something on,” she claims Trump “unzips his pants, and, forcing his fingers around my private area, thrusts his penis halfway — or completely, I’m not certain — inside me.”

After apparently struggling free, she says, “I don’t remember if any person or attendant is now in the lingerie department. I don’t remember if I run for the elevator or if I take the slow ride down on the escalator. As soon as I land on the main floor, I run through the store and out the door — I don’t recall which door — and find myself outside on Fifth Avenue.”

The story itself beggars belief. If a celebrity had tried to rape me in a public place, I think the first thing I might have done was tell someone. In the words of her own friends, E. Jean Carroll is an “attention-seeker.” It is already difficult to imagine such a scenario unfolding without immediate consequences for the assailant, let alone when the victim is a nationally published attention-seeker.

 

[GURPS]

Attorneys for former President Donald Trump on Monday responded to a recent report issued by a court-appointed independent monitor regarding Trump Organization finances, disputing former judge Barbara Jones’s characterization of the financial statements as incomplete and inconsistent.
Ms. Jones recommended that third party monitoring of Trump Organization continue, and concluded that “misstatements and errors may continue to occur,” which defense attorneys said was an effort to continue the monitor’s “exorbitant” fees paid by Trump Organization. Ms. Jones has been paid $2.6 million in her 14-month period as an independent monitor on the case.

Ms. Jones’s team has received Trump Organization financial disclosures to third parties, including lenders and insurers; agreements and documents related to transactions; documents related to Trump Organization entities and dissolutions; bank statements; and documents provided to tax authorities.

Attorney Clifford Robert claimed that the Jan. 26 report, submitted at the request of the court, was also meant to “fill the gaping hole in the Attorney General’s case” and was issued “in bad faith.”

“The January 26 Report also contains numerous factual inaccuracies (casting serious doubt on the Monitor’s competency), fails to reference governing standards of any kind, and is otherwise misleading and disingenuous,” the letter reads.
The report pointed out errors on seven disclosure items, three inconsistencies, and five clerical errors, which the defense argues are immaterial amid the thousands of pages of financial data related to the 400 entities Ms. Jones is monitoring.

“The Monitor was appointed to report any financial reporting misconduct, suspicious activity or any suspected or actual fraudulent activity,“ the letter reads. ”The Monitor was not appointed to identify math errors or otherwise sensationalize minor and inconsequential accounting discrepancies scattered throughout the financial reports of the over 400 companies comprising the Defendants’ global enterprise.”
Mr. Robert pointed out that the biggest discrepancy Ms. Jones identified was a difference of $1 million in an “internal trial balance presentation,” and had no actual impact. Mentions of delays in implementing transactions had provided “no evidence of any inappropriate or untoward conduct,” he added, claiming this representation as an effort to “malign such disclosures.”

Mr. Robert noted that the words “misconduct,” “suspicious activity,” “suspected fraud,” or “actual fraud” do not appear in Ms. Jones’s report at all, and argued the errors she cites have been blown out of proportion.

“Moreover, as the Reports and the January 26 Report make clear, every item identified has been resolved to the full satisfaction of the Monitor,” he added. “She has not and cannot point to even a single instance of controversy or complaint between any of the Defendants and outside third parties.”

He pointed to five reports Ms. Jones previously submitted, in which she wrote that Trump Organization defendants were repeatedly “complying with” and “continuing to comply with” court orders and the third-party monitoring as a pattern of ongoing cooperation and good faith.

“The Monitor now twists immaterial accounting items into a narrative favoring her continued appointment, and thereby the continued receipt of millions of dollars in excessive fees,” Mr. Robert argued.

Mr. Robert argued there is no purpose in continuing the monitoring of Trump Organization going forward.

Monitor’s Report in Fraud Case Contains ‘Factual Inaccuracies,’ Is ‘Disingenuous’ Says Trump Attorney

www.theepochtimes.com

 

[GURPS]

As promised, here are some great updates on the various Trump Cases. Don’t get my optimism wrong, what the President is enduring is indescribable. I represent people in lawsuits and I can assure you that even one lawsuit is overwhelming for many folks. It’s a thousand times worse when the lawsuit is unfair. I can’t imagine what Trump is going through.

But this week delivered good incremental developments in nearly every pending case.

In the Georgia prosecution, the news got even worse for beleaguered prosecutor Fani Willis, who still hasn’t resigned yet, for some reason. In the latest development, the Free Beacon “obtained” a two-minute whistleblower audio evidencing even more financial impropriety in Ms. Willis’ office in 2021:





One wonders who might’ve “leaked” the audio, and one muses about how it was kept on ice for two years until just the right moment. The evidence against Willis is now repugnant to any realistic notion she can keep her job. How she’s kept it this long is some kind of demonic miracle.

That wasn’t all. Yesterday Fox ran a story reporting the formation of another state committee to investigate fancy Fani’s follies:





The oversight panel was proposed last year, but the state’s Supreme Court shot it down since it would have required the Court to “oversee” executive-branch prosecutors. The newly-revised and re-submitted bill solves the problem by cutting the Court out of the loop.

Fox’s story quoted John Malcolm, a former assistant U.S. attorney in Atlanta, who explained that Fani Willis “ought to be looked into, (since she) has certainly imperiled this prosecution and given a black mark, not only to Fulton County, but potentially to the entire state, so I can understand why the Georgia legislature is up in arms about this.” So.

A new wrinkle briefly appeared and then just as quickly disappeared this week in the $83 million-dollar-verdict case featuring colorful plaintiff E. Jean Carroll. Early in the week, Trump’s lawyers filed a bombshell motion based on facts reported in an old New York Post story, facts alleging that U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan had mentored Jean Carroll’s lawyer while in private practice but had failed to disclose the relationship.

After Carroll’s lawyer denied even knowing Kaplan, Trump’s lawyer promptly and prudently withdrew the motion to avoid serious sanctions. Lawyers can’t make serious allegations against judges and survive unless they can prove it.

But what’s left sitting on the table like an uneaten meal is the question of how the New York Post’s article originally got it wrong about the mentoring relationship, and why no one bothered to complain about the error when it was published. So we can assume the story isn’t completely over yet.

Down in Florida, in the “Mar-a-Lago raid” classified documents case, the New York Sun ran a story this week headlined, “Jack Smith Is Set To Meet Secretly With Judge Cannon Over What Documents Trump Will See.” Despite widespread media confusion over exactly what’s going on, it’s pretty simple. The government — via special prosecutor Jack Smith — refused to provide Trump’s lawyers with the alleged classified documents, probably (as far as we can tell) related to the CIA’s secret report on the Democrats’ Russia Collusion hoax.

Trump’s lawyers then complained to Federal Judge Aileen Cannon, who has been skeptical of the government’s position in the past. Judge Cannon said fine, on February 12th I’ll take a look at the documents myself at a ‘SCIF’ — a secured government facility for viewing classified documents — and decide whether or not they are truly “critical to national security” and therefore should be kept secret.

If Judge Cannon does order the documents to be turned over, then Prosecutor Smith will have to immediately appeal her ruling to the 11th Circuit, and if he lost, appeal to the Supreme Court, whose docket is starting to clog up with Trump cases. Media legal analysts suggest an appeal would inconveniently move Trump’s trial out past the elections, a delay Prosecutor Smith apparently wants to avoid, which is an observation that completely gives away the political nature of what is really going on in these cases.

Anyway, what’s significant is that, even if Trump’s team never gets the documents, Judge Cannon will have seen them. She will soon know what this case is all really about, which will influence her future decisions in the case. So this could be an inflection point for the case regardless of whether the documents are released.

Finally, in Illinois, the state Elections Board voted unanimously this week to allow Trump on the primary ballot despite objections from democracy-loving democrats to keep Trump off the Republican primary ballot on the theory that Trump is an insurrectionist. Headline from the Guardian:





So far the democrats’ 14th Amendment argument doesn’t seem to be gripping in very many places. Meanwhile Colorado’s decision to remove Trump from the ballot is amidst an frenzied, expedited briefing phase before oral arguments next week on February 8th.

☕️ SWIPED ☙ Thursday, February 1, 2024 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

"Argentina's Trump" winning; news on the Trump cases; Illinois keeps Trump on ballot; Florida university ditches DEI department; DeSantis vows help for Texas; McCullough crunches numbers; and more.

www.coffeeandcovid.com

 

[GURPS]

Verdict Delayed in Trump Civil Fraud Trial as Judge Engoron Weighs Lifetime Business Ban​

While it’s unclear why Justice Engoron is taking more time to deliver the verdict, reports suggest that it could have something to do with a 12-page letter issued by a court-appointed monitor claiming that parts of President Trump’s financial disclosure appeared incomplete or inconsistent.

Attorneys for President Trump, who maintains his innocence and has called the case a political witch hunt, have disputed the monitor’s characterization of the financial disclosures.
The letter from the monitor, former judge Barbara Jones, pointed out errors on seven disclosure forms, three inconsistencies, and five clerical errors.

President Trump’s attorneys have said the issues flagged by Ms. Jones are immaterial amid the thousands of pages of financial data she has received, which include Trump Organization financial disclosures to third parties, documents related to transactions, bank statements, and all manner of paperwork related to taxes.

Trump attorney Clifford Robert alleged in a letter to Justice Engoron that Ms. Jones’s report, which was issued just days before the expected Jan. 31 verdict, had two basic objectives: one to ensure that the monitor continues to receive “exorbitant” fees (over $2.6 million and counting), and the other to justify continued oversight of President Trump’s business empire.
Mr. Robert also questioned the monitor’s competency, alleging “numerous factual inaccuracies” in her report, which he characterized as “misleading and disingenuous.”

He argued that the errors cited by the monitor have been blown out of proportion and that every item she identified had been fully resolved.

“The Monitor now twists immaterial accounting items into a narrative favoring her continued appointment, and thereby the continued receipt of millions of dollars in excessive fees,” Mr. Robert argued.

Ms. Jones did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the Trump attorney’s claims.

 

[vraiblonde]

The best part is that the oversized porcine specimen still needs to put up the cash now. Given that he’s not very liquid means he’ll have to sell assets in order to cover his liability. I’d imagine he’s going to have to liquidate ~120mn to satisfy.

That puts a smile on my face.

Perhaps I will make an offer for a few cases of ketchup.

That's because you Democrats are all mentally ill liars and fascists who should be strapped to the chair. You're like serial killers - you destroy for sport with no remorse or even consideration of what you're doing. It's fun for you to hurt people and bust sh*t up.

So of course hurting someone your diseased brain has arbitrarily identified as an enemy puts a smile on your face. You jerk off to it. Serial killers do that - smile and jerk off when they kill and destroy. If it were up to me you'd all be put down like the rabid dogs you are.

 

[HemiHauler]

That's because you Democrats are all mentally ill liars and fascists who should be strapped to the chair. You're like serial killers - you destroy for sport with no remorse or even consideration of what you're doing. It's fun for you to hurt people and bust sh*t up.

So of course hurting someone your diseased brain has arbitrarily identified as an enemy puts a smile on your face. You jerk off to it. Serial killers do that - smile and jerk off when they kill and destroy. If it were up to me you'd all be put down like the rabid dogs you are.

 

[GURPS]

Yesterday brought a little more good legal news for President Trump. The Post-Millennial ran its story yesterday about one of the pending Trump cases headlined “BREAKING: Trump J6 case REMOVED from DC court docket.”





I know. It’s devilishly hard to keep track of all these different lawsuits and prosecutions. It seems like they multiply faster than rabbits. I’d love to assign each one some kind of shorthand nickname for easy reference, but that would just baffle new readers. So each time, at peril of boring regular C&C readers, I have no choice but to remind everyone which case we’re talking about so nobody gets left behind.

Banana Republican and Special Prosecutor Jack Smith, pictured above, is trying his best to lock up President Trump in two different federal criminal prosecutions, one in South Florida and another completely separate one in DC. Today’s update relates to the DC case, which The Washington Post says is for “charges of plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 election.”

Uh huh. Overturning the results by throwing a rally miles from the Capitol. Okay.

Anyway, the back story is that Trump moved to dismiss this case, since at the time of the alleged plotting, Trump was President and enjoyed presidential immunity. Presidents need immunity, or else every bloated Fani Willis in the country would be constantly filing charges against them and harassing them to distraction.

Judge Chutkan promptly swept aside two centuries of Presidential precedent and ruled nope, no presidential immunity. Trump’s lawyers just as promptly appealed. The DC Circuit Court of Appeals is currently considering the case, and has stayed the trial pending its decision. Once the DC Circuit’s three-judge panel rules, Trump can then appeal to the full DC Circuit, and after that he can appeal to the Supreme Court.

It’ll take months and months. A trial this year is a distant memory.

But Judge Chutkan was holding on to Trump’s summer trial date like an old man holding on to his counter ticket at the deli. But yesterday, the judge apparently gave up her hopes of keeping a 2024 trial and canceled it without setting a new date.

Generally speaking, any defendant who’s not in hoosgow greatly prefers not having a trial date. This is even more true in Trump’s case, since democrats want too see Trump in the slammer before the elections, and they need trials to do it. The removal of Trump’s case from Judge Chutkan’s docket means it ain’t gonna happen before November.

While it might seem like a little scheduling thing, you really have to see the depressing effect it had on democrat partisans. After the news, social media libs seemed hopeless, adrift, and were trying to comfort each other, like a group of Gazan survivors wandering through the rubble or something. For instance, this lawyer — assuming his Twitter bio is real — specializes in “complex litigation,” and told despairing democrats not to worry, that Judge Chutkan can just reschedule Trump’s trial whenever she wants:







Um, no. That’s an awful take; it’s just wrong. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt that he bathroom tweeted without really thinking it through. The appellate process must finish before Judge Chutkan can re-schedule the trial.

The “prospect of a fast trial” is over.

☕️ WHIRLWIND REAPERS ☙ Friday, February 2, 2024 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

A special report on the emerging anti-credentialist backlash, with a guest appearance from your favorite lockdown doc; good news in Trump's DC case disappoints dems; and Florida delivers for Texas.

www.coffeeandcovid.com

 

[my-thyme]

 

[GURPS]

Judge in Trump Civil Fraud Case Responds to Accusations of Bias in the Civil Fraud Case​

Judge Arthur Engoron’s Feb. 8 email to Trump attorney Cliff Robert chides the lawyer for questioning the judge’s objectivity.
“You and your co-counsel have been questioning my impartiality since the early days of this case, presumably because I sometimes rule against your clients,” Judge Engoron wrote. “That whole approach is getting old.”

The insistence on his objectivity—and rebuke of Mr. Robert for suggesting otherwise—stemmed from a Monday email from Judge Engoron, in which he demanded answers from counsel amid rumors that Trump co-defendant Allen Weisselberg was negotiating a plea deal for perjury.

“As the presiding magistrate, the trier of fact, and the judge of credibility, I of course want to know whether Mr. Weisselberg is now changing his tune, and whether he is admitting he lied under oath in my courtroom at this trial,” Judge Engoron wrote.

‘Falsus In Uno’​

The judge added that he was considering using Mr. Weisselberg’s potential admission that he lied in court to invoke “falsus in uno,” a legal doctrine that a witness who testified falsely about one thing is not credible to testify about other matters.

This means Judge Engoron was considering dismissing Mr. Weisselberg’s broader testimony, which could include statements he made that cast President Trump in a positive light and so would weigh in favor of the former president as the judge considers his final verdict and potential punishment.

The trial centers on allegations that the former president and his company, The Trump Organization, defrauded banks, insurers, and others by allegedly overvaluing his assets and exaggerating his net worth in documents used in deals and to secure loans.

The case was brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James, who initially wanted to fine the former president $250 million but later increased this to $370 million.

Ms. James has requested additional penalties against President Trump, including a permanent ban on his doing business in New York state and with any New York-based financial institution.

Judge Engoron, who even before the trial began issued a summary judgment finding President Trump and his company liable for fraud, is preparing to issue his final verdict, which could be as harsh as banning the former president for life from doing business in New York.

How Harsh a Punishment?​

As Judge Engoron considers issuing his verdict, there have been several developments with the apparent potential to affect the severity of the verdict.

This includes a letter issued by a court-appointed monitor claiming that parts of President Trump’s financial disclosure appeared incomplete or inconsistent.

Also, Ms. James recently asked Judge Engoron to consider a newfound legal precedent that she believes bolsters her case for a permanent Trump business ban.

And now, there are the rumors of Mr. Weisselberg’s potential perjury plea deal, with respect to which Judge Engoron asked Trump counsel to provide him with information “detailing anything you know about this.”

In that request to Trump counsel, Judge Engoron cited a report from The New York Times, which claimed based on anonymous sources that Mr. Weisselberg was negotiating a plea deal for perjuring himself when he took the stand in the the civil fraud trial in October.

In his response to Judge Engoron, Mr. Robert berated the judge for his “unprecedented, inappropriate and troubling” request that “calls into question the impartiality of the court.”

The Trump attorney also criticized Judge Engoron for considering “unsubstantiated news reports in rendering” his decision.

 

[stgislander]

Judge Engoron has drug his ruling out way too long. He must think he's SCOTUS.

 

[GURPS]

Under New York State law, a money judgment is excessive “...if it deviates materially from what would be reasonable compensation.” This standard requires the court to review the evidence presented at trial in support of the award and compare the award to other similar New York cases.

A review of New York case law on defamation reveals no comparable awards to this one, in fact it is not even close. New York law simply does not support compensatory damages of more than $3 or $4 million, nowhere near the $18,300,000 awarded to Carroll by the jury. There are no $18.3 million compensatory damage awards by New York State courts. Once the award is found to be excessive it must be lowered to the maximum amount which can be recovered. This is known as the maximum recovery rule. At the very least, Carroll’s compensatory damages should be reduced from $18.3 million to $3 or $4 million. (There is also the issue of duplicative damage awards, since similar awards were made by both juries, including for “repairing” Carroll’s reputation and defamation).

The Excessive Punitive Damages. While compensatory damages are awarded to compensate someone for actual losses, punitive damages may be awarded in some instances as a punishment. Again, the jury in the Carroll case awarded $65,000,000 in punitive damages on Carroll’s 2019 claims. This award is grossly excessive under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution.

In BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, the United States Supreme Court ruled an excessive punitive damage award under State law violates the 14th Amendment Due Process rights of the party cast in judgment. The Court noted the primary concern is the ratio of the compensatory damages to the punitive damages. In another case the Supreme Court observed when compensatory damages are “substantial” a punitive damage award equal to the compensatory damage award would usually be the most allowed. Federal cases confirm compensatory damage awards in the $300,000 to $1,000,000 range (far less than the award to Carroll) were “substantial” for these purposes. See here, here and here.

The punitive damage award in Carroll of $65,000,000 is 3.55 times the outrageously high $18.3 million-dollar compensatory damages award. This punitive damage award is clearly unconstitutionally excessive and should be reduced to a 1 to 1 ratio.

What should happen as the case moves forward is the compensatory damage award of $18.3 million dollars should be reduced to $3 or $4 million, then the punitive damage award should be limited to a ratio of 1 to 1 to the compensatory damages. If that happens, the total award would be in the $7 to $8 million dollar range ($3 or $4 million in compensatory damages and $3 or $4 million in punitive damages).

Even if the Court twists and contorts itself into allowing the $18.3 million in compensatory damages to somehow stand, the punitive damages will necessarily be reduced to an equivalent amount of $18.3 million resulting in a massive reduction in the total damages to $36,000,000.00.

While, any of these amounts are unreasonably high for a claim of a person who cannot remember the year a sexual assault allegedly took place, the overwhelming likelihood is E. Jean Carroll will not recover anywhere near $83.3 million, even if Trump’s efforts to get the entire judgment reversed prove unsuccessful.

What the Media hasn't Told you About Carroll v. Trump

By now, everyone in the entire world heard about a New York federal jury’s award of $83 million dollars to E. Jean Carroll against Donald J. Trump for what she claims was defamation arising from her claim of a sexual assault in a Bergdorf&rsquo...

www.americanthinker.com

 

[stgislander]

Finally. Judge Engoron rules against Trump (like we all knew he would). Now we can finally get to the Appeals Court.

 

[WingsOfGold]

Finally. Judge Engoron rules against Trump (like we all knew he would). Now we can finally get to the Appeals Court.

Nobody has doxed him or that crazy bitch yet????
Have they never owned any RE and understand how tax valuations work???? Who in their right mind would live in NY??????

 

[RoseRed]

Who would all this money be paid to?

 

[PJay]

 

[WingsOfGold]

View attachment 175474

Awful lot like Carlos Danger if one ask me. Wonder if he was trolling for kids?

 

[PJay]

Awful lot like Carlos Danger if one ask me. Wonder if he was trolling for kids?

Are they reporting this on MSM? If not, why not......