Yesterday 7:41 pm
So why does this matter? It matters because Mr. Trump now contends that the jury’s $2 million compensatory damages award for Ms. Carroll’s sexual assault claim was excessive because the jury concluded that he had not “raped” Ms. Carroll.5 Its verdict, he says, could have been based upon no more than “groping of [Ms. Carroll’s] breasts through clothing or similarconduct, which is a far cry from rape.”6 And while Mr. Trump is right that a $2 million award for such groping alone could well be regarded as excessive, that undermines rather than supports his argument. His argument is entirely unpersuasive.ROG62 » 17 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ 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 YorkPenal Law – a section that provides that the label “rape” as used in criminal prosecutions in NewYork applies only to vaginal penetration by a penis. Forcible, unconsented-to penetration of thevagina or of other bodily orifices by fingers, other body parts, or other articles or materials is notcalled “rape” under the New York Penal Law. It instead is labeled “sexual abuse.”
F-U-C-K-O-F-F…