• JesusSon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    “As the court explained in its recent decision denying Mr Trump’s motion for a new trial on damages and other relief [in the New York case] … based on all of the evidence at trial and the jury’s verdict as a whole, the jury’s finding that Mr Trump ‘sexually abused’ Ms Carroll implicitly determined that he forcibly penetrated her digitally – in other words, that Mr. Trump, in fact, did ‘rape’ Ms. Carroll as that term commonly is used and understood in contexts outside of the New York penal law.” - Lewis A. Kaplan: Senior Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

    • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Am I reading this right that it’s because a civil decision by jury implies rape?

      • FanciestPants@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        Pretty much, except it may be more appropriate to replace “implies” with “determined there was sufficient evidence to conclude”

        • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Listen, I’m not a lawyer, I’m not trying to say I am.

          It’s widely understood that civil litigation is held to a lower level of scrutiny than criminal proceedings are.

          It’s widely accepted that jury trials are more prone to error than other types of hearings.

          The legal meaning of the word “implicit” in that sentence is something close to “we didn’t ask the jury about this, but something they did rule on could be interpreted as implying it”.

          I’m not making an excuse for trump or normalizing rape when I say the following:

          That is paper fucking thin.