Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Political Chat Rooms
‹
Peanut Gallery
‹
R: Kaolan DID NOT overturn the Jury Verdict.
R: Kaolan DID NOT overturn the Jury Verdict.
By *Huey
9 Aug 2025 8:43 am in Peanut Gallery
10 Aug 2025 11:49 am
I think it worth noting that the OP has previously taken the position that this is merely a socialist judge offering unsolicited opinion.*Huey » 09 Aug 2025, 8:44 am » wrote: ↑ Google AI
Judge Lewis A. Kaplan presided over the E. Jean Carroll defamation trial against Donald Trump where a jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation, awarding Carroll $5 million in damages
.
Judge Kaplan did not overturn the jury's verdict in that case. In fact, he later upheld the verdict and denied Trump's motion for a new trial.
It's important to note that a judge can overturn a jury's verdict in certain specific circumstances, such as if there wasn't enough evidence to support the verdict or if there were errors during the trial that prejudiced the outcome. However, this is relatively rare.
In this particular case, Judge Kaplan not only upheld the jury's verdict but also, in a later, separate trial determining damages for a different defamatory statement, ruled that Trump was precluded from arguing that he did not sexually assault Ms. Carroll, leaving only the issue of damages to be decided by the jury.
And that is all there is to say about that.
But the OP is a Coward of Many Stands.
10 Aug 2025 12:03 pm
No, the coward would be the guy who won't provide a linked quote about that. ;)Blackvegetable » 10 Aug 2025, 11:49 am » wrote: ↑I think it worth noting that the OP has previously taken the position that this is merely a socialist judge offering unsolicited opinion.*Huey » 09 Aug 2025, 8:44 am » wrote: ↑ Google AI
Judge Lewis A. Kaplan presided over the E. Jean Carroll defamation trial against Donald Trump where a jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation, awarding Carroll $5 million in damages
.
Judge Kaplan did not overturn the jury's verdict in that case. In fact, he later upheld the verdict and denied Trump's motion for a new trial.
It's important to note that a judge can overturn a jury's verdict in certain specific circumstances, such as if there wasn't enough evidence to support the verdict or if there were errors during the trial that prejudiced the outcome. However, this is relatively rare.
In this particular case, Judge Kaplan not only upheld the jury's verdict but also, in a later, separate trial determining damages for a different defamatory statement, ruled that Trump was precluded from arguing that he did not sexually assault Ms. Carroll, leaving only the issue of damages to be decided by the jury.
And that is all there is to say about that.
But the OP is a Coward of Many Stands.
BV is in question time out indefinitely, until he takes the pledge to answer questions one for one.
The Pledge viewtopic.php?f=3&t=100927
Popular Vote Totals 2024 viewtopic.php?p=2685476#p2685476
BV's Sporter Losshttps: viewtopic.php?p=2610828#p2610828
BV 33 miles: viewtopic.php?p=2747521#p2747521
Sources viewtopic.php?p=2589152#p2589152
The Pledge viewtopic.php?f=3&t=100927
Popular Vote Totals 2024 viewtopic.php?p=2685476#p2685476
BV's Sporter Losshttps: viewtopic.php?p=2610828#p2610828
BV 33 miles: viewtopic.php?p=2747521#p2747521
Sources viewtopic.php?p=2589152#p2589152
10 Aug 2025 2:11 pm
The facts are as follows.*Huey » 10 Aug 2025, 12:11 pm » wrote: ↑ He knows what the facts are. The problem is he can never be wrong in his mind. He really thinks he is superior to us so that means he can never admit to being wrong in front of us. It is the same issue with the semi auto sports rifles. He knows damn well he is wrong but for 8 years now refuses to admit it.
The jury’s verdict was in favor of the Plaintiff in the amount of $2 million.
Respondent appealed the amount of the award, arguing that it was excessive given that the jury - in the course of a special verdict process - did not conclude that Respondent had penetrated the Plaintiff with his penis.
The Judge rejected that argument, in upholding the original verdict.
Judge Kaplan has been upheld at every level.
10 Aug 2025 2:22 pm
Blackvegetable » 10 Aug 2025, 2:11 pm » wrote: ↑The facts are as follows.*Huey » 10 Aug 2025, 12:11 pm » wrote: ↑ He knows what the facts are. The problem is he can never be wrong in his mind. He really thinks he is superior to us so that means he can never admit to being wrong in front of us. It is the same issue with the semi auto sports rifles. He knows damn well he is wrong but for 8 years now refuses to admit it.
The jury’s verdict was in favor of the Plaintiff in the amount of $2 million.
Respondent appealed the amount of the award, arguing that it was excessive given that the jury - in the course of a special verdict process - did not conclude that Respondent had penetrated the Plaintiff with his penis.
The Judge rejected that argument, in upholding the original verdict.
Judge Kaplan has been upheld at every level.
I am going to PG that because it has absolutely nothing to do with the title or the OP. The verdict was NO RAPE. You already said so meaning you are admitting I. am correct.
BV is in question time out indefinitely, until he takes the pledge to answer questions one for one.
The Pledge viewtopic.php?f=3&t=100927
Popular Vote Totals 2024 viewtopic.php?p=2685476#p2685476
BV's Sporter Losshttps: viewtopic.php?p=2610828#p2610828
BV 33 miles: viewtopic.php?p=2747521#p2747521
Sources viewtopic.php?p=2589152#p2589152
The Pledge viewtopic.php?f=3&t=100927
Popular Vote Totals 2024 viewtopic.php?p=2685476#p2685476
BV's Sporter Losshttps: viewtopic.php?p=2610828#p2610828
BV 33 miles: viewtopic.php?p=2747521#p2747521
Sources viewtopic.php?p=2589152#p2589152
10 Aug 2025 2:37 pm
I am going to PG that because it has absolutely nothing to do with the title or the OP. The verdict was NO RAPE. You already said so meaning you are admitting I. am correct.
:rofl:
You have made ZERO references to any facts.
Post a link to the motion to which Judge Kaplan responded.
:rofl:
You have made ZERO references to any facts.
Post a link to the motion to which Judge Kaplan responded.
10 Aug 2025 2:43 pm
The verdict in question was*Huey » 10 Aug 2025, 2:31 pm » wrote: ↑ The argument ended right here when you posted this:
Yup, he did not overturn the verdict.
Game....Set....Match.
In favor of the.Plaintiff, in the amount of 2 million.
Period.
10 Aug 2025 3:10 pm
You have never linked to*Huey » 10 Aug 2025, 2:31 pm » wrote: ↑ The argument ended right here when you posted this:
Yup, he did not overturn the verdict.
Game....Set....Match.
The Jury Verdict
The Appeal
Judge Kaplan's response.
10 Aug 2025 3:11 pm
Not period.Blackvegetable » 10 Aug 2025, 2:43 pm » wrote: ↑The verdict in question was*Huey » 10 Aug 2025, 2:31 pm » wrote: ↑ The argument ended right here when you posted this:
Yup, he did not overturn the verdict.
Game....Set....Match.
In favor of the.Plaintiff, in the amount of 2 million.
Period.
NOT for rape. Here is the verdict in question from the OP you lied and said does not specify what verdict:The verdict in question was
In favor of the.Plaintiff, in the amount of 2 million.
Judge Lewis A. Kaplan presided over the E. Jean Carroll defamation trial against Donald Trump where a jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation, awarding Carroll $5 million in damages
.
Judge Kaplan did not overturn the jury's verdict in that case. In fact, he later upheld the verdict and denied Trump's motion for a new trial.
Period
#real37x that I quoted you in full, in context, verbatim, and with a link. That it is how a man does it. You have been spewing the same **** that has already been posted, over and over and over. You agreed with the OP 100%.
Now lie your way out of that, #real37x.
.
BV is in question time out indefinitely, until he takes the pledge to answer questions one for one.
The Pledge viewtopic.php?f=3&t=100927
Popular Vote Totals 2024 viewtopic.php?p=2685476#p2685476
BV's Sporter Losshttps: viewtopic.php?p=2610828#p2610828
BV 33 miles: viewtopic.php?p=2747521#p2747521
Sources viewtopic.php?p=2589152#p2589152
The Pledge viewtopic.php?f=3&t=100927
Popular Vote Totals 2024 viewtopic.php?p=2685476#p2685476
BV's Sporter Losshttps: viewtopic.php?p=2610828#p2610828
BV 33 miles: viewtopic.php?p=2747521#p2747521
Sources viewtopic.php?p=2589152#p2589152
10 Aug 2025 3:14 pm
Yes.*Huey » 10 Aug 2025, 3:11 pm » wrote: ↑ Not period.
NOT for rape. Here is the verdict in question from the OP you lied and said does not specify what verdict:
Judge Lewis A. Kaplan presided over the E. Jean Carroll defamation trial against Donald Trump where a jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation, awarding Carroll $5 million in damages
.
Judge Kaplan did not overturn the jury's verdict in that case. In fact, he later upheld the verdict and denied Trump's motion for a new trial.
Period
#real37x that I quoted you in full, in context, verbatim, and with a link. That it is how a man does it. You have been spewing the same **** that has already been posted, over and over and over. You agreed with the OP 100%.
Now lie your way out of that, #real37x.
.
PERIOD.
10 Aug 2025 3:18 pm
AFTER I added in what you left out, #real37x. You really showed what an ignorant, arrogant, nose in the air asshole you are over this. All the forum saw. Great job.Blackvegetable » 10 Aug 2025, 3:14 pm » wrote: ↑Yes.*Huey » 10 Aug 2025, 3:11 pm » wrote: ↑ Not period.
NOT for rape. Here is the verdict in question from the OP you lied and said does not specify what verdict:
Judge Lewis A. Kaplan presided over the E. Jean Carroll defamation trial against Donald Trump where a jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation, awarding Carroll $5 million in damages
.
Judge Kaplan did not overturn the jury's verdict in that case. In fact, he later upheld the verdict and denied Trump's motion for a new trial.
Period
#real37x that I quoted you in full, in context, verbatim, and with a link. That it is how a man does it. You have been spewing the same **** that has already been posted, over and over and over. You agreed with the OP 100%.
Now lie your way out of that, #real37x.
.
PERIOD.
My last word concerning the topic of my thread. YOU AGREED with me and the OP.
BV is in question time out indefinitely, until he takes the pledge to answer questions one for one.
The Pledge viewtopic.php?f=3&t=100927
Popular Vote Totals 2024 viewtopic.php?p=2685476#p2685476
BV's Sporter Losshttps: viewtopic.php?p=2610828#p2610828
BV 33 miles: viewtopic.php?p=2747521#p2747521
Sources viewtopic.php?p=2589152#p2589152
The Pledge viewtopic.php?f=3&t=100927
Popular Vote Totals 2024 viewtopic.php?p=2685476#p2685476
BV's Sporter Losshttps: viewtopic.php?p=2610828#p2610828
BV 33 miles: viewtopic.php?p=2747521#p2747521
Sources viewtopic.php?p=2589152#p2589152
10 Aug 2025 3:22 pm
Quoting from the response of Judge Kaplan to the petition for relief.
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 similar conduct, 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.
This jury did not award Ms. Carroll more than $2 million for groping her breasts through her clothing, wrongful as that might have been. There was no evidence at all of such behavior. Instead, the proof convincingly established, and the jury implicitly found, that Mr. Trump deliberately and forcibly penetrated Ms. Carroll's vagina with his fingers, causing immediate pain and long lasting emotional and psychological harm. Mr. Trump's argument therefore ignores the bulk of the evidence at trial, misinterprets the jury's verdict, and mistakenly focuses on the New York Penal Law definition of “rape” to the exclusion of the meaning of that word as it often is used in everyday life and of the evidence of what actually occurred between Ms. Carroll and Mr. Trump.
There is no basis for disturbing the jury's sexual assault damages. And Mr. Trump's arguments with respect to the defamation damages are no stronger.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-di ... aw-content
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 similar conduct, 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.
This jury did not award Ms. Carroll more than $2 million for groping her breasts through her clothing, wrongful as that might have been. There was no evidence at all of such behavior. Instead, the proof convincingly established, and the jury implicitly found, that Mr. Trump deliberately and forcibly penetrated Ms. Carroll's vagina with his fingers, causing immediate pain and long lasting emotional and psychological harm. Mr. Trump's argument therefore ignores the bulk of the evidence at trial, misinterprets the jury's verdict, and mistakenly focuses on the New York Penal Law definition of “rape” to the exclusion of the meaning of that word as it often is used in everyday life and of the evidence of what actually occurred between Ms. Carroll and Mr. Trump.
There is no basis for disturbing the jury's sexual assault damages. And Mr. Trump's arguments with respect to the defamation damages are no stronger.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-di ... aw-content
10 Aug 2025 3:24 pm
Tiny,*Huey » 10 Aug 2025, 3:18 pm » wrote: ↑ AFTER I added in what you left out, #real37x. You really showed what an ignorant, arrogant, nose in the air asshole you are over this. All the forum saw. Great job.
My last word concerning the topic of my thread. YOU AGREED with me and the OP.
Run from the text of the very opinion to which the OP refers....
10 Aug 2025 3:26 pm
IDIOT OP ACTUALLY CONSIGNS TEXT OF THE ACTUAL DECISION TO PG......*Huey » 09 Aug 2025, 8:44 am » wrote: ↑ Google AI
Judge Lewis A. Kaplan presided over the E. Jean Carroll defamation trial against Donald Trump where a jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation, awarding Carroll $5 million in damages
.
Judge Kaplan did not overturn the jury's verdict in that case. In fact, he later upheld the verdict and denied Trump's motion for a new trial.
It's important to note that a judge can overturn a jury's verdict in certain specific circumstances, such as if there wasn't enough evidence to support the verdict or if there were errors during the trial that prejudiced the outcome. However, this is relatively rare.
In this particular case, Judge Kaplan not only upheld the jury's verdict but also, in a later, separate trial determining damages for a different defamatory statement, ruled that Trump was precluded from arguing that he did not sexually assault Ms. Carroll, leaving only the issue of damages to be decided by the jury.
And that is all there is to say about that.
10 Aug 2025 4:26 pm
I haven't agreed to anything of the sort.*Huey » 10 Aug 2025, 3:33 pm » wrote: ↑ @Blackvegetable
Since you finally agreed that there was no finding of Rape and Kaplan did not over turn the verdict mentioned in the OP, meaning he is not a rapist felon, there is no need to for me to continue.
With that said...Since you are begging for my attention across multiple threads I figured I would give it to you. Yesterday I bought a Byrna SD. It is legal in all 50 states in one way or another. It is Non Lethal/Less Lethal Projectile launcher. Launches a .68 cal ball rounds that are either kinetic hard plastic round or contains a pepper spray/tear gas mix at 280 fps. As the resident expert at getting pepper sprayed I was kinda wondering what you think.
Mine of course is orange. For safety.
Neither does the evidence, which is why you have to run from it.
10 Aug 2025 5:36 pm
*Huey » 10 Aug 2025, 3:33 pm » wrote: ↑ @Blackvegetable
Since you finally agreed that there was no finding of Rape and Kaplan did not over turn the verdict mentioned in the OP, meaning he is not a rapist felon, there is no need to for me to continue.
With that said...Since you are begging for my attention across multiple threads I figured I would give it to you. Yesterday I bought a Byrna SD. It is legal in all 50 states in one way or another. It is Non Lethal/Less Lethal Projectile launcher. Launches a .68 cal ball rounds that are either kinetic hard plastic round or contains a pepper spray/tear gas mix at 280 fps. As the resident expert at getting pepper sprayed I was kinda wondering what you think.
Mine of course is orange. For safety.
Who asked him to "over turn it", and why?Since you finally agreed that there was no finding of Rape and Kaplan did not over turn the verdict mentioned in the OP, meaning he is not a rapist felon,
10 Aug 2025 5:44 pm
That's your vague retelling...*Huey » 09 Aug 2025, 8:44 am » wrote: ↑ Google AI
Judge Lewis A. Kaplan presided over the E. Jean Carroll defamation trial against Donald Trump where a jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation, awarding Carroll $5 million in damages
.
Judge Kaplan did not overturn the jury's verdict in that case.
Here are Judge Kaplan's words.....relevant because you reference his opinion.
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.”1
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. Carroll failed to prove that she was “raped” within the meaning of the New York Penal Law does 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.
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 similar conduct, 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.
This jury did not award Ms. Carroll more than $2 million for groping her breasts through her clothing, wrongful as that might have been. There was no evidence at all of such behavior. Instead, the proof convincingly established, and the jury implicitly found, that Mr. Trump deliberately and forcibly penetrated Ms. Carroll's vagina with his fingers, causing immediate pain and long lasting emotional and psychological harm. Mr. Trump's argument therefore ignores the bulk of the evidence at trial, misinterprets the jury's verdict, and mistakenly focuses on the New York Penal Law definition of “rape” to the exclusion of the meaning of that word as it often is used in everyday life and of the evidence of what actually occurred between Ms. Carroll and Mr. Trump.
There is no basis for disturbing the jury's sexual assault damages. And Mr. Trump's arguments with respect to the defamation damages are no stronger.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-di ... aw-content
10 Aug 2025 7:17 pm
Unless he was groomed by a dude in a tiara...RebelGator » 10 Aug 2025, 6:15 pm » wrote: ↑ No thanks, I won't even go fishing with someone that wears a tunic.
10 Aug 2025 7:48 pm
See, this is where YOU LOSE!!Blackvegetable » 10 Aug 2025, 2:11 pm » wrote: ↑
Respondent appealed the amount of the award, arguing that it was excessive given that the jury - in the course of a special verdict process - did not conclude that Respondent had penetrated the Plaintiff with his penis.
IT was NOT an appeal that was filed to get Kaplan's "rape" opinion, but a COUNTERCLAIM to the original suit. A TOTALLY different animal, loser!!
Want to try again??
Liberals are spoiled children, miserable, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic & useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats ~O'Rourke
The Democratic Party seems intransigent on their position of keeping the party ‘woke,’ detached, exclusionary, and totally insane.
The Democratic Party seems intransigent on their position of keeping the party ‘woke,’ detached, exclusionary, and totally insane.
10 Aug 2025 7:58 pm
No, it wasn't.*Beekeeper » 10 Aug 2025, 7:48 pm » wrote: ↑ See, this is where YOU LOSE!!
IT was NOT an appeal that was filed to get Kaplan's "rape" opinion, but a COUNTERCLAIM to the original suit. A TOTALLY different animal, loser!!
Want to try again??
It was a petition to reduce the award...
11 Aug 2025 5:31 am
Runs from the opinion he cites...*Huey » 09 Aug 2025, 8:44 am » wrote: ↑ Google AI
Judge Lewis A. Kaplan presided over the E. Jean Carroll defamation trial against Donald Trump where a jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation, awarding Carroll $5 million in damages
.
Judge Kaplan did not overturn the jury's verdict in that case. In fact, he later upheld the verdict and denied Trump's motion for a new trial.
It's important to note that a judge can overturn a jury's verdict in certain specific circumstances, such as if there wasn't enough evidence to support the verdict or if there were errors during the trial that prejudiced the outcome. However, this is relatively rare.
In this particular case, Judge Kaplan not only upheld the jury's verdict but also, in a later, separate trial determining damages for a different defamatory statement, ruled that Trump was precluded from arguing that he did not sexually assault Ms. Carroll, leaving only the issue of damages to be decided by the jury.
And that is all there is to say about that.
What a **** moron.
Who is online
In total there are 3331 users online :: 5 registered, 15 bots, and 3311 guests
Bots: DuckDuckGo, Baiduspider, NING, LCC, proximic, CriteoBot, app.hypefactors.com, ADmantX, YandexBot, Mediapartners-Google, Applebot, linkfluence.com, bingbot, curl/7, Googlebot