Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 7:01 am » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 7:01 am

Shut your padresucker and read the filing, Connie...

Your idea of the "jury verdict" is in laughable error.

If you insist.  First, the filing WAS NOT A TRIAL VERDICT.  It is his ruling on the appeal.  Here is a link to the filing by Kaplan;

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .212.0.pdf

Starting on page 3 (emphasis mine);

"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 – a section that provides that the label “rape” as used in criminal prosecutions in New York applies only to vaginal penetration by a penis. Forcible, unconsented-to penetration of the vagina or of other bodily orifices by fingers, other body parts, or other articles or materials is not called “rape” under the New York Penal Law. It instead is labeled “sexual abuse.”

As is shown in the following notes, 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,2 in some federal and state criminal statutes,3 and elsewhere.4 The finding that Ms. 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.

Read the notes...he clearly admits, for his ruling on the appeal, he is using definitions found in codes other than NY Law.

Here is a link TO THE ACTUAL JURY VERDICT FORM in the trial E Jean Carroll v Donald J Trump

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/05/0 ... l-00096059