Trump guilty of sexual abuse and defamation

Ag3ma

Elite Member
Jan 4, 2023
2,502
2,169
118
A jury has found ex-president Donald J. Trump guilty of sexual abuse (but not rape) and defamation, and he has been ordered to pay E. Jean Carroll $5 million. Trump intends to appeal.

I hope this gives E. Jean Carroll some peace of mind after her traumatic experience.

 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,482
925
118
Country
USA
E. Jean Carroll is a prolific writer, who within her long career has written for NBC, for Playboy, and on her own doing true crime non-fiction pieces. If you put NBC, crime, and playboy into a food processor, what comes out the other end is Law and Order: Special Victims Unit.

E. Jean King claims that she bumped into Donald Trump in the Bergdorf Goodman department store, where he proceeded to coax her to the lingerie section, and ultimately into a changing room where he raped her. In season 13, episode 11 of SVU, a character describes nearly exactly the same scenario, a prominent man enters the changing room while a woman is trying on lingerie in specifically the Bergdorf Goodman department store. There are a few possibilities here:

A) It's completely coincidence. Technically possible, but that is a few specifics to have accidentally overlap perfectly.
B) She pulled her story from SVU. Also technically possible, but even less likely than the first option if you ask me. A writer of all people plagiarizing a rape accusation is far fetched.
C) SVU got the story from her. Law and Order, especially Special Victims Unit, is well known for getting its stories from real world events, many episodes ripped straight from the headlines. Again, Carroll is a writer who has worked for NBC and wrote true crime stories. There is a highly plausible scenario here where she confided in someone connected to SVU who then wrote it into an episode (she had two witnesses testify on her behalf, that she told them about the event at the time, one is another writer who has worked in tv, the other is a news anchor who also worked on Dateline, she told her tv friends about it).

So, with this amount of information, you might reasonably think "well, if her exact stories were told years ago and reenacted on tv exactly as she described, that's probably corroboration for the accusation, right?" This is where the twist comes in, because the one thing that doesn't match from her claim to the SVU episode is that in SVU, it wasn't rape, it was a story of consensual, public, sexual roleplay. Well, that's just tv, that's not really evidence... but then Carroll has made a few comments in interviews since then that might raise some eyebrows. In interviews about her owned alleged rape, she rarely makes it through the story without playful comments about how fun lingerie is. She's bragged in Vanity Fair about wearing very little under a trench coat so that she could flash her professor in college. Oh, and she told Anderson Cooper on tv that "most people think of rape as sexy", and that she doesn't want to call it a rape because she wasn't "thrown to the floor and ravaged".

So a woman who probably thinks rape is sexy and has exhibitionist tendencies inspired part of an SVU episode with her story about the time she went into a public changing room with Donald Trump.

This case is a civil case. The case would disintegrate instantly in a criminal trial where the standard is proof beyond reasonable doubt, because oh boy, there's a lot of things to have reasonable doubt about here. In a civil case, the standard is "the preponderance of evidence", given the evidence presented, the jury needs only conclude the accusation is more likely than not to have happened. And the were asked if they thought it was most likely that Trump raped her, and they said "no". Not even in New York could a jury be convinced a rape even probably occurred.

Trump got convicted of this because he publicly called her a fraud until it actually became a case, and then with lawyers involved, he defended the claim that stars can just grab women by their whatever, and suggested that she liked it, which deliberately or not actively confirms the event happened (he at minimum felt her up in a public place he should not have been) and he lied publicly about it. It's not easy to prove defamation, but Trump did a good job of building the case. That being said, this woman is also a loony, and was probably disappointed that he didn't "throw her to the ground and ravish her".
 
  • Like
Reactions: gorfias

Ag3ma

Elite Member
Jan 4, 2023
2,502
2,169
118
I think they did reflect on it carefully
Tstorm notes "preponderance of evidence". I would suggest that the preponderance of evidence, via his own words and the many, many allegations levelled against him, is that he has routinely sexually assaulted women. An official confirmation by a court of him committing sexual assault, irrespective of a lower standard of evidence in civil cases, is thus immensely satisfying.

What we also see from Tstorm is that this looks likely to change almost nothing in Republican perceptions of Trump. In his defence, they have simply reached into the same misogynistic tropes that have been employed for decades, even centuries: "she wanted it", "she deserved it because she's weird", "prostitutes and women who enjoy sex can't be raped", etc. Anything that they need to say to lie to themselves that they aren't voting for a sex attacker.
 
Last edited:

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
18,647
3,574
118
What we also see from Tstorm is that this looks likely to change almost nothing in Republican perceptions of Trump. In his defence, they have simply reached into the same misogynistic tropes that have been employed for decades, even centuries: "she wanted it", "she deserved it because she's weird", "prostitutes and women who enjoy sex can't be raped", etc. Anything that they need to say to lie to themselves that they aren't voting for a sex attacker.
Trump did once say that he could shoot a man in broad daylight and it wouldn't matter. In this, he was not lying, and probably not even exaggerating.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,482
925
118
Country
USA
What the fuck is wrong with you?
I tell the truth.
This is a remarkably repellent statement that I would suggest that you reflect on very carefully.
I suggest you give up the act. You don't believe this woman was lacking peace of mind after her traumatic experience, or anything like that. You're here to celebrate the conviction of your favorite enemy, that is all.
An official confirmation by a court... is thus immensely satisfying.
This, this exactly. This is what you're here for.
In his defence, they have simply reached into the same misogynistic tropes that have been employed for decades
Did I defend Trump? I said Trump was convicted because of his own actions and statements. Is that defense? If this were on the AITA subreddit, the verdict is ESH. There is no good person in this story, there is no innocent victim. While Trump was rightfully convicted of what he was, he arguably has a stronger defamation suit against her, who publicly and officially accused him of rape while making numerous contradictory statements about how it wasn't rape, and claiming she had no idea going into the lingerie dressing room with Donald Trump had sexual implications while also publicly talking about how many times she's tried to seduce powerful men by showing off her body to them.

The way she's talked about the event, the way she's described her fantasies, the things she's done elsewhere, the way she told her friends, and their reaction, all paint a pretty clear picture to me of what happened.

She ran into Trump at the store. She flirted with him. She played along with him in the lingerie department and went into the dressing room expecting him to have his way with her. She was disappointed that "his way" really sucked, and had to push him off to leave. But she still thought an affair with a powerful man was something she could brag about to her friends, and she was surprised when they suggested she press charges.

All of this matches the decision of the jury. Her being a naïve victim brutally traumatized by a monster is not supported by the dismissal of the rape charge. The jury obviously believes the event occurred to convict on sexual assault. But if it occurred as described it's also obviously rape. If she went into that room without consent to sexual interaction at all, and then he forcibly penetrated her, there's no argument that isn't rape. The assault conviction without the rape conviction to me says "she obviously consented to a sexual engagement with Trump, she went in the dressing room to strip for him, but then he assaulted her."
 

Chimpzy

Simian Abomination
Legacy
Escapist +
Apr 3, 2020
12,237
8,495
118
That is a really weird way to promote his appearance on CNN Town Hall tonight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Ag3ma

Elite Member
Jan 4, 2023
2,502
2,169
118
I suggest you give up the act. You don't believe this woman was lacking peace of mind after her traumatic experience, or anything like that.
Kindly don't project your contempt for the welfare of others onto me.

You're here to celebrate the conviction of your favorite enemy, that is all.
No, I'll celebrate literally anyone who has abused others being found guilty, especially people who employed their power and wealth to facilitate that abuse over a long period of time. I was similarly immensely satisfied when Harvey Weinstein went down, and Jeffrey Epstein, and Bill Cosby, etc. (and that's just in the field of rape and sexual assault). That this time it is Trump is merely icing on the cake of justice delivered.

Did I defend Trump?
Yes.

That's exactly what you're doing here, in the form of supplying damage limitation and attacking anything and everything else.
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Mar 15, 2008
14,321
1,501
118
What the fuck is wrong with you?
This is why I don't understand why literally any of you even bother talking to TStorm. There's like...maybe a dozen people active in this forum so no one is on the sideline here needing convincing and every single thread in this subforum is filled with TStorm saying something...let's say Zany...and everyone arguing with him about his zaniness until the next zany thing he says and the cycle just repeats.

I've stopped bothering coming to a lot of these threads as they always devolve in the same exact way.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,075
5,814
118
Country
United Kingdom
The way she's talked about the event, the way she's described her fantasies, the things she's done elsewhere, the way she told her friends, and their reaction, all paint a pretty clear picture to me of what happened.
What this tells me is that you think there's a 'correct' way for a victim to act, and an incorrect way. And that if someone doesn't exhibit the approved behaviours their allegations can be ignored.

The same kind of blinkered, judgemental attitude that has hampered investigation into sexual assault for decades.
 

gorfias

Unrealistic but happy
Legacy
May 13, 2009
7,106
1,862
118
Country
USA
@ 8:30 or so, she tells Anderson Cooper that her response to the "assault" was to laugh and make no objections. She is 6'1".


Giving her the benefit of the doubt and believe this happened, I don't think she even knows to this day how she feels about it. Which means you may have a case of regret after the fact.

You all expressed surprise @tstorm823 's positing that she may have wanted to be "ravished".

Does anyone on this forum actually doubt that a large majority of women, particularly those who enjoy bodice ripping romance novels, fantasize about rough sex from sexually aggressive men?

Do you doubt this 6'1" woman couldn't have kicked the living shit out of Donald, dragged him into the middle of the store and screamed, "this lout assaulted me"? Could she have, IDK, said something? Instead, this woman in her 50s had, she alleges, sex with a real estate tycoon in a public space that no doubt had plenty of attendants within ear shot. And now she has been awarded $5 million over the incident.

I think, if DT did this, he was very foolish to do so as he opened himself up to this type of expoitation. Smarter men like Henry Caville are simply staying away from women. He, and increasingly others, sees that we are outlawing nookie. Which, as an old man, I guess I shouldn't care. And the A.I. sexbots are coming.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
18,647
3,574
118
@ 8:30 or so, she tells Anderson Cooper that her response to the "assault" was to laugh and make no objections. She is 6'1".


Giving her the benefit of the doubt and believe this happened, I don't think she even knows to this day how she feels about it. Which means you may have a case of regret after the fact.

You all expressed surprise @tstorm823 's positing that she may have wanted to be "ravished".

Does anyone on this forum actually doubt that a large majority of women, particularly those who enjoy bodice ripping romance novels, fantasize about rough sex from sexually aggressive men?

Do you doubt this 6'1" woman couldn't have kicked the living shit out of Donald, dragged him into the middle of the store and screamed, "this lout assaulted me"? Could she have, IDK, said something? Instead, this woman in her 50s had, she alleges, sex with a real estate tycoon in a public space that no doubt had plenty of attendants within ear shot. And now she has been awarded $5 million over the incident.

I think, if DT did this, he was very foolish to do so as he opened himself up to this type of expoitation. Smarter men like Henry Caville are simply staying away from women. He, and increasingly others, sees that we are outlawing nookie. Which, as an old man, I guess I shouldn't care. And the A.I. sexbots are coming.

What this tells me is that you think there's a 'correct' way for a victim to act, and an incorrect way. And that if someone doesn't exhibit the approved behaviours their allegations can be ignored.

The same kind of blinkered, judgemental attitude that has hampered investigation into sexual assault for decades.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,075
5,814
118
Country
United Kingdom
Does anyone on this forum actually doubt that a large majority of women, particularly those who enjoy bodice ripping romance novels, fantasize about rough sex from sexually aggressive men?
Ah, and here we have the predictable equation of rough sex fantasies with wanting to be sexually assaulted (along with more prurient judgementalism over how a victim should act in their opinion).

I almost have a complete line on my classic misogyny bingo card. Anyone going to insinuate that women would be fine with being assaulted if the guy was handsome, so therefore its their fault for being shallow? I really want to win that toaster oven.