22 Dec 2024 7:06 pm
That snip is from a ruling on the appeal of the award...it was NOT a ruling on the accusations made by Carroll. The jury had already done that. You also seem to ignore the following from page 3 of the filing.Blackvegetable » 22 Dec 2024, 7:39 pm » wrote: ↑ “Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”
The jury’s unanimous verdict in Carroll II was almost entirely in favor of Ms. Carroll. The only point on which Ms. Carroll did not prevail was whether she had proved that Mr. Trump had “raped” her within the narrow, technical meaning of a particular section of the New York Penal Law
The jury ruled Trump did not rape Carroll under NY Law...the ONLY law that is applicable in the case. Kaplan apparently searched until he found a definition he liked more than the law he swore to uphold as a judge. You will need to ask him why he chose to ignore NY law when it had no bearing on the amount of the award. Many feel his focus on an issue that was not part of the award (which was the reason for his filing) and going outside the applicable law while doing so, demonstrates a prejudicial bias that may be grounds for dismissal.