No, it didn't.*Huey » 21 Aug 2024, 7:50 am » wrote: ↑ The jury did rejected the rape claim. That is a fact.
My work is done here.
He - presiding judgeBeekeeper » 21 Aug 2024, 7:25 am » wrote: ↑ I READ the JURY FINDINGS and there was NO FINDING OF RAPE!!
And THAT is the ONLY "verdict" or OPINION that matters in the COURT OF LAW IN THIS NATION!! Ever read the US Constitution and see that part where you have a RIGHT To a trial in front of a jury of your peers??
Can you point us to that section in the Constitution where a "judge" can bloviate his "opinion" and that be a factual finding??? NO?? Well imagine that, DICKBREATH, you got CURB STOMPED AGAIN!!
Explain why a conviction is required?
Black Veggie already said...
Also in 1998, Juanita Broaddrick alleged that Clinton had raped her in the spring of 1978, although she said she did not remember the exact date.[15] To support her charge, Broaddrick notes that she told multiple witnesses in 1978 she had been raped by Clinton, something these witnesses also state in interviews to the press.[16] Broaddrick had earlier filed an affidavit denying any "unwelcome sexual advances" and later repeated the denial in a sworn deposition.[15] In a 1998 NBC interview wherein she detailed the alleged rape, Broaddrick said she had denied (under oath) being raped only to avoid testifying about the ordeal publicly.[15]
Hole,BooRadley » 21 Aug 2024, 8:38 am » wrote: ↑ Also in 1998, Juanita Broaddrick alleged that Clinton had raped her in the spring of 1978, although she said she did not remember the exact date.[15] To support her charge, Broaddrick notes that she told multiple witnesses in 1978 she had been raped by Clinton, something these witnesses also state in interviews to the press.[16] Broaddrick had earlier filed an affidavit denying any "unwelcome sexual advances" and later repeated the denial in a sworn deposition.[15] In a 1998 NBC interview wherein she detailed the alleged rape, Broaddrick said she had denied (under oath) being raped only to avoid testifying about the ordeal publicly.[15]
Like talking to moss.Beekeeper » 21 Aug 2024, 8:43 am » wrote: ↑ You're the one getting your *** CURB STOMPED HERE, so you need to RUN FASTER since you have NOTHING in terms of a JURY FINDING!!
And that's what counts in American Jurisprudence!!
Suck on that one, DICKBREATH!!
Blackvegetable » 21 Aug 2024, 7:52 am » wrote: ↑ No, it didn't.
He added: “Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”
He - presiding judge
You - illiterate
And you claim a conviction isn't important?
Yes, and the JURY FOUND NO RAPE OCCURRED, DICKSUCKER!!
Stupid Hole,BooRadley » 21 Aug 2024, 8:46 am » wrote: ↑ And you claim a conviction isn't important?
What high school are you in?
Quiet.Beekeeper » 21 Aug 2024, 8:49 am » wrote: ↑ Yes, and the JURY FOUND NO RAPE OCCURRED, DICKSUCKER!!
doc-1394900-trump-liable-verd-promo-superJumbo.png (1088×1408) (nyt.com)
You're not just a **** IDIOT, you are one OBTUSE MORONIC **** LOSER IDIOT THAT IS GETTING HIS *** CURB STOMPED MASSIVELY AND IS TOO STUPID TO SHUT THE **** UP!!
Were you the presiding judge?Beekeeper » 21 Aug 2024, 8:46 am » wrote: ↑ Tell us DICKBREATH, how can a JURY MARK THEIR FINDINGS SHEET "no rape occurred" and a JUDGE then makes some blanket STATEMENT WHICH IS A LIE and you believe it???
AND who is the ILLITERATE PIECE OF **** HERE if you actually subscribe to THAT ****, DICKBREATH??
Your reply......what you posted....Blackvegetable » 21 Aug 2024, 8:50 am » wrote: ↑ Stupid Hole,
It was a CIVIL trial.
It doesn't result in a conviction, but it DOES result in a jury finding.
That jury finding has been confirmed by THE PRESIDING JUDGE, who did so in officially debunking the Team Grifty spin.
How many hours, Hole?
Blackvegetable » 21 Aug 2024, 8:51 am » wrote: ↑ Quiet.
Was the jury trial presided over by a judge?
You've been answered, Hole.BooRadley » 21 Aug 2024, 8:52 am » wrote: ↑ Your reply......what you posted....
"JURY FINDING"...
Can you show us where the jury found him guilty of rape?