Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHere's the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Carroll v. Trump.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca2.60504/gov.uscourts.ca2.60504.176.1.pdf
7 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Here's the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Carroll v. Trump. (Original Post)
Ocelot II
Monday
OP
sop
(11,687 posts)2. "On review for abuse of discretion, we conclude that Mr. Trump has not demonstrated that the district court
erred in any of the challenged rulings. Further, he has not carried his burden to show that any claimed error or combination of claimed errors affected his substantial rights as required to warrant a new trial."
AFFIRMED.
mobeau69
(11,679 posts)3. Pay up rapist.
LetMyPeopleVote
(155,746 posts)4. This will be a fun read
Jacson6
(871 posts)5. I think DJT will appeal to the full circuit court & then SCOTUS.
It's hard to beat a jury verdict in the appeal of a civil case. The judges will defer to the juror's decision in 99% of cases.
Ocelot II
(121,600 posts)6. Probably. And I doubt even this SCOTUS will grant cert.
LetMyPeopleVote
(155,746 posts)7. Lisa Rubin has a good thread on this opinion
Reading the opinion and this thread was amusing brought back memories of the evidence class that I took in law school
Link to tweet
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1874116905830932850.html
The appellate decision affirming E. Jean Carrolls first jury verdict against Donald Trump is a 77-page foray into rules of evidence. You might be tempted to put it aside. Dont look away. 1/
Its holdings about the use of testimony from other sexual assault victims and other evidence that shows a defendants modus operandi not only will complicate Trumps continued efforts to fight Carrolls two jury verdicts but will reverberate throughout federal courts. 2/
Perhaps the most significant part, at least to this observer, is the court refusing to find error in the trial courts admission of the Access Hollywood tape. 3/
In general, federal evidentiary rules prohibit the admission of a defendants prior bad acts to show their propensity to commit the crime or conduct at issue. But there are exceptions, including where the evidence tends to show a pattern or modus operandi. 4/
And thats exactly what, according to the three-judge appellate panel, the tape, coupled with the other accusers testimony showed: a repeated, idiosyncratic pattern of conduct consistent with what Ms. Carroll alleged. 5/
The panel continued, In each of the three encounters, Mr. Trump engaged in an ordinary conversation with a woman he barely knew, then abruptly lunged at
her in a semi-public place and proceeded to kiss and forcefully touch her without her consent. 6/
And those acts, they ruled, are sufficiently similar to show a pattern or recurring modus operandi. 7/
One of my friends told me over the weekend that she has never been so despondent about womens power, at least the kind of power they obtain and exercise independently, not derivatively from a male parent, partner, or mentor. 8/
And while I wholly appreciate where she is coming from, remember this: 2024 was also the year in which a federal appeals court decided that the word of three women, juxtaposed against the smirking admissions of one man, could justify a game-changing jury verdict. 9/
Even if that man is the former or future president. 10/
p.s. We have been trained to think accountability comes solely through criminal law. Let 2025 be the year that we stop treating civil judgments like prosecutions poor relation. What matters, as Gisele Pelicot reminds us, is that the shame changes sides.
Its holdings about the use of testimony from other sexual assault victims and other evidence that shows a defendants modus operandi not only will complicate Trumps continued efforts to fight Carrolls two jury verdicts but will reverberate throughout federal courts. 2/
Perhaps the most significant part, at least to this observer, is the court refusing to find error in the trial courts admission of the Access Hollywood tape. 3/
In general, federal evidentiary rules prohibit the admission of a defendants prior bad acts to show their propensity to commit the crime or conduct at issue. But there are exceptions, including where the evidence tends to show a pattern or modus operandi. 4/
And thats exactly what, according to the three-judge appellate panel, the tape, coupled with the other accusers testimony showed: a repeated, idiosyncratic pattern of conduct consistent with what Ms. Carroll alleged. 5/
The panel continued, In each of the three encounters, Mr. Trump engaged in an ordinary conversation with a woman he barely knew, then abruptly lunged at
her in a semi-public place and proceeded to kiss and forcefully touch her without her consent. 6/
And those acts, they ruled, are sufficiently similar to show a pattern or recurring modus operandi. 7/
One of my friends told me over the weekend that she has never been so despondent about womens power, at least the kind of power they obtain and exercise independently, not derivatively from a male parent, partner, or mentor. 8/
And while I wholly appreciate where she is coming from, remember this: 2024 was also the year in which a federal appeals court decided that the word of three women, juxtaposed against the smirking admissions of one man, could justify a game-changing jury verdict. 9/
Even if that man is the former or future president. 10/
p.s. We have been trained to think accountability comes solely through criminal law. Let 2025 be the year that we stop treating civil judgments like prosecutions poor relation. What matters, as Gisele Pelicot reminds us, is that the shame changes sides.