[ad_1]
(Photo by David Becker/Getty Images)
Donald Trump would like to remind you that he pinned E. Jean Carroll up against the wall and forced his fingers inside her, but was unable to penetrate her with his penis. In fact, he’s so interested in driving this point home that he just sued ABC and George Stephanopoulos for eliding the distinction.
It’s not clear why the former president insists on reminding us of this at regular intervals, but it happens often enough that it can’t be an accident.
It started on the steps of the courthouse after the first jury ruled that Trump was liable for sexual assault, not rape. His attorney Joe Tacopina, was able to convince the jurors that Trump might not have been able to get his penis inside her while restraining her with his arms and his torso.
“I’m happy that Donald Trump was not branded a rapist,” the lawyer said to reporters on the courthouse steps, attempting to spin the sexual assault and defamation verdicts as some kind of win.
Trump’s longtime ally Alan Dershowitz echoed the statement, calling it a “Rorschach verdict,” since the jurors found Trump “liable on kinda molesting her,” but not for rape.
Almost immediately, Trump filed a motion for a new trial or remittitur, on the theory that the jury must have been confused when it assessed $2 million in compensatory damages for conduct which could have amounted to no more than “groping of [Carroll’s] breasts through clothing or similar conduct, which is a far cry from rape.”
Judge Kaplan denied the motion, noting that Trump is a rapist under the colloquial definition of the term, if not under New York law.
The definition of rape in the New York Penal Law is far narrower than the meaning of ‘rape’ in common modern parlance, its definition in some dictionaries, in some federal and state criminal statutes, and elsewhere,” the court noted, citing dictionaries and other jurisdictions’ laws defining “rape” as non-consensual penetration of any kind. The finding that Ms. 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.” Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.
Undeterred, Trump turned around and filed a counterclaim for defamation against Carroll based on the theory that she lied about having been raped. That was also denied, and, in a separate order, Judge Kaplan reiterated that Trump was indeed still a rapist.
Mr. Trump’s principal argument is just wrong. As this Court explained in its recent decision denying Mr. Trump’s motion in Carroll II for a new trial on damages or other relief, the Carroll II jury’s answer to the special verdict question concerning whether Mr. Trump “raped” Ms. Carroll established only that she had failed to prove that he penetrated her vagina with his penis. Indeed, the jury’s finding that Mr. Trump sexually abused her implicitly determined that he had penetrated her vagina with his fingers, a form of “rape” as that word often is used.
So Stephanopoulos wasn’t too far off the truth when he repeatedly asserted on March 10 that Trump had been found liable for rape by a judge and a jury. And yet Trump filed a defamation lawsuit against him and his employer yesterday in the Southern District of Florida, alleging that the statements had been made with actual malice.
There are about a million potential problems with this trollsuit, starting with the fact that it was filed in the Miami division, where no party resides . But this isn’t the first rodeo for Trump’s attorney Alejandro Brito, who sued Michael Cohen for saying mean things about Trump and also took over Trump’s defamation suit against CNN for using the phrase “the Big Lie.”
The first case was voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff, and the second one got booted by Judge Raag Singhal, Trump’s own appointee. But perhaps the third time is the charm for Brito, who took full advantage of the litigation privilege to repeat the defamatory statements which have cost Trump dearly, referring in the complaint to “Carroll’s false, fabricated, and defamatory allegations.”
Filing in the Miami division, as opposed to Palm Beach where Trump lives, was unsubtle — although not as unsubtle as the time he sued the Pulitzer Committee in Okeechobee County state court on the theory that you can access the prize board’s website there. But if the hope was to score Judge Aileen Cannon or another of Trump’s own appointees, the ploy failed. The case was assigned to Chief Judge Cecilia Altonaga, a George W. Bush appointee who is not noticeably insane.
On the other hand, before this turkey gets yeeted into the sun, Trump will be able to annoy ABC and fundraise off his heroic fight against the evil media, so … MAGA MAGA MAGA!
Trump v. ABC [Docket via Court Listener]
Liz Dye lives in Baltimore where she produces the Law and Chaos substack and podcast.
[ad_2]
