I said there is an intrinsic injustice in any trial in which the defendant has no opportunity to submit evidence he was not at the location at the time that is alleged. Do you disagree with that?
Didn't you say you were a legal expert on this forum?
Political genius
- Thread starter BuilderBob6
- Start date
Didn't you say you were a legal expert on this forum?
Trump most certainly had the opportunity to testify at the sexual assault civil trial. His legal team most certainly had the ability to present witnesses and evidence that he was not at the scene.
Trump most certainly decided not to testify at the sexual assault civil trial (and that's his prerogative). Why? Because he did not want to be cross examined.
Of course, at the defamation damages trial, he got on the stand, knowing that he could only be cross-examined about the defamation issue. When he started testifying at the defamation trial about his distaste for the sexual assault verdict, his testimony was objected to, and the objection was sustained .
Imagine that! He was afforded the right that exactly aligns with what you were hoping for.
- Because our justice system has rules and procedures, and
- Because our justice system has a series of appellate processes that review filings alleging misconduct or misapplication of the law, and
- Because in our justice system the trial jury is the finder of fact.
That's 'Merica. If you don't like it? That's a 'you' problem.
Last edited:
May 3, 2023:
A lawyer defending former President Donald J. Trump against the writer E. Jean Carroll’s lawsuit accusing him of rape said that he would present no witnesses during the trial, which completed its sixth day Wednesday.
The lawyer, Joseph Tacopina, had earlier told Judge Lewis A. Kaplan that Mr. Trump would not come to Manhattan federal court to testify in the civil case.
Trump has not attended the trial. "I hear we're doing very well in New York," Trump said on Wednesday when asked why he was not in court. He spoke to reporters in Scotland where he was playing golf.
How was he supposed to testify that he couldn't have been there at the "time" if the accuser didn't have a "time."?
A potential sexual assault victim is not required to have a calendar/timer worthy memory.
If they do? That is helpful testimony. If they don't? That is fodder for cross-examination. And I'm sure that her lack of exact recollection of the time/date was a focus of cross-examination. There was a witness that effectively time-stamped the assault by noting when Carroll told her - just after it happened. And that witness' memory and notes comported with Carroll's general memory. That witness was also cross-examined.
I would hope you are not suggesting that any crime victim or litigant that cannot independently recall the exact time of the incident should have their case auto-dismissed.
Last edited:
For what it's worth - Trump made statements not in the trial court stating that he did not know Carroll, that she was "not his type" (i.e. too ugly to be assault-worthy) and that the incident did not happen at any time ever.
Of course, the trial jury did not hear that from him on the witness stand because he refused to testify during the trial. Because he was playing golf in Scotland. Ya think that made the jury go "hmmmmmmm?"
Last edited:
You ever think maybe playing golf in Scotland is more important in the long run than giving time and credence to someone who remembered she was "raped" more than 20 years ago as she was prodded to file the case against DJT by others with a higher motive?
- No.
- As I said, it was his prerogative to present (or not present) a defense, and to testify or not.
- I think it was more important that he hire a lawyer that was really good, not one who was (in my opinion) hired because she was good-looking and would humor her client.
- I think it was important that he keep his big, narcissistic, bad-judgment mouth shut after the verdict so that it would
- fade into obscurity, and
- so that he wouldn't repeatedly public defame her,
- bringing it back into the public eye,
- potentially costing him tons of votes with independent women, and
- cost him $83.3 million, which for all Trump knows could be donated to Trump's political opponents.
More from the "Political Genius:"
He's now shopping for new lawyers. So he issues this social media post today:
“Any lawyer who takes a TRUMP CASE is either ‘CRAZY,’ or a TRUE AMERICAN PATRIOT,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “I will make my decision soon!”
Guess what? Given those choices by a potential client spoken out loud for the world to see?
Any really savvy, ultimately experienced, high-level lawyer will read that social media post and think "Crazy."
He's now shopping for new lawyers. So he issues this social media post today:
“Any lawyer who takes a TRUMP CASE is either ‘CRAZY,’ or a TRUE AMERICAN PATRIOT,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “I will make my decision soon!”
Guess what? Given those choices by a potential client spoken out loud for the world to see?
Any really savvy, ultimately experienced, high-level lawyer will read that social media post and think "Crazy."
It's a convenient point that she can't put a date on it therefore Trump can't come up with an actual defense.
I have no idea of your practice, but I'd bet good money if DJT were to call you and ask for your help, you'd wet yourself while saying "yes sir".
Do you think it was a coordinated effort then? Because "rigged case" doesn't add up when the victim cannot date the incident, but the plaintiff's attorney's have a date from another witness who testified when Carroll told her "this terrible thing just happened."
MORE IMPORTANTLY, do you think that Taylor Swift is part of this coordinated effort?!!?
- Never said that I have a legal practice.
- If I did/do? Like so, so many competent lawyers already have, I would run as fast as I could in the other direction if I was ever approached by a client that
- stiffs lawyers,
- makes public statements on legal matters without consulting the lawyer,
- publicly and knowingly lies, and
- who seldom adheres to advice from his lawyers.
It has been promoted by Trump and his acolytes to the maximum political potential, at the expense of so many that are everyday, hardworking American heroes. And that's a monumental shame. Leadership matters, and Trump is contrary to everything that real, effective leadership should be.
So my integrity and values are hard-wired; they cannot be bought for any price. I weep for those whose can.
Last edited:
You claim you did not read the testimony, yet you make a sexist comment about his attorney.
Tell us, do you think Kam moved up in Cal politics because she was good-looking and would 'humor' her sponsor, Willie Brown?
Do you think she was picked to be VP because she was good-looking in terms of skin color and would 'humor' her boss by being dumber than he is?
That attorney is very young, not very experienced, and was dumped by Trump today.
Kind of a different calculation in picking a political partner versus picking a trial attorney, don’t you think? A political genius like Trump should have realized that.
Hey, did a little research for you!
Trump’s lawyer for a lot of this is Alina Habba, a 30 something fairly recent graduate of Widener law school. Of note, Widener law school is currently ranked 177 out of 196 accredited law schools in the United States. Hey, at least it’s cool that she went to an accredited law school!
Prior to defending Trump she worked for her husband‘s seven person law firm, until she divorced the guy, and now heads her own five person law firm for which she has been the lead attorney for a grand total of three cases! That is, prior to defending president Donald J Trump. To her credit, in addition to defending President Trump, she is the general counsel for her new husbands parking garage!
So, maybe the genius of Donald Trump thought that she was an extraordinarily underrated legal genius! Or maybe he hired her based on her appearance? Maybe he hired her based on a combination of her appearance, and her willingness to suck up to a client who lies about damn near everything and never takes lawyers’ advice.
Quite the shrewd, political genius, that Donald J Trump!
All of those sexist reasons of yours sound better than whatever could have been Crow's reason to pick Kamala, who could be president at any moment if Joe chokes to death on an ice cream cone.
Last edited:
Riveting reverting to Diverting!
The surest sign that Riveting has been owned trying to defend DonaTrump
The thread is 'political genius', not "how to try a court case in NY when the fix is in."
Trying to laugh off a reminder that you were busted lying to this forum to support your loyalty to Biden?
More reminders to come.
And you’re getting owned while there’s a Purdue basketball game on tv!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA
Geez—not a fan of Biden too old. But at least he isn’t old and owing Jean Carroll $83.3 million!
Riveting reverting to Diverting
AHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAA
Taylor Swift? WTF are you talking about?
They have no idea when exactly it was supposed to happen. NO person that has ever been raped would have forgotten when they were attacked. Period. Not to mention that her story is almost identical to a Law and Order SVU episode. She was apparently a big fan of the show.
On top of that, the supposed dress she was wearing when it happened wasn't even made yet.
There are just too many holes and inconsistencies. This is just another example of lefties lying to ruin the lives of people they hate. Jussie Smollett is a perfect example. There are many others.
Major move by MAGA nation to go to culture war with Taylor Swift. Must have learned it by deciphering an otherwise confusing Law and Order episode.
Smart move- Taylor Swift is clearly is a deep state actor.
I have no idea WTF you're talking about with this Taylor Swift crap. I'm sure it's just that. Crap.
Vivek says she’s deep state.
So does Laura Loomer.
So does Jesse Waters.
Political geniuses all of them!
And Liz Cheney says Taylor is a national treasure! MORE proof that Swift is a Democrat secret asset.
Vivek left his Trump NH victory party star turn convinced that the Super Bowl will be rigged to benefit Taylor Swift’s boyfriend, all as arranged by the deep state and the Democrats.
Sounds like a bit from the onion, because you couldn’t make up shit this funny if you tried. But it’s true.
Sounds like a bit from the onion, because you couldn’t make up shit this funny if you tried. But it’s true.
Trump does. Except for Cheney, but of course that scoundrel is “pro-Swift.”
Figures.
Trump lives Vivek and Laura Loomer almost more than he loves Kanye, Fuentes, Mikey Flynn, and J6 “hostages!” Yay!!
I don't listen to everything that Trump says. There's a reason why there's a saying that goes: "actions speak louder than words". I like Trump because of his actions while in office. He was a good president. I have said multiple times I think he's a jackass as a person. His actions are what matters most, and the fact that people can't realize this and go for a smooth talker over a good leader's actions just blows my mind.
