Tag: trial

  • ‘Fear and shame’: jury hears opening arguments in Trump civil assault trial

    ‘Fear and shame’: jury hears opening arguments in Trump civil assault trial

    [ad_1]

    Donald Trump’s lawyer told a New York jury on Tuesday that the advice columnist E Jean Carroll conspired with other women to falsely accuse the former president of rape because they “hate” him for winning the 2016 election.

    The opening day of a civil trial in a Manhattan federal court heard that Carroll is suing Trump for battery and defamation “to clear her name, to pursue justice and to get her life back” after the former president allegedly raped her in a New York department store in 1996 and then denied it years later.

    But Trump’s lawyer, Joseph Tacopina, told the jury of three women and six men that Carroll filed the lawsuit for political ends, to sell a book and for public attention.

    Tacopina said that the rape accusation was invented by Carroll and two other women who are expected to testify that she told them about the assault shortly afterwards.

    “They schemed to hurt Donald Trump politically,” he said.

    Tacopina suggested to the jury that Carroll first accused then president Trump of rape after meeting George Conway who was a vocal critic who was married to Kellyanne Conway, one of the president’s closest aides in the White House. The judge upheld an objection to the claim by Carroll’s lawyers. It is not clear if Tacopina will return to it when Carroll gives evidence.

    Carroll accuses Trump of assaulting her in a dressing room of the New York department store Bergdorf Goodman in 1996 after they ran into each other at the entrance and he asked for help in choosing a present for a friend.

    Carroll sat stony faced at the front of the courtroom as her lawyer, Shawn Crowley, told the jury that Trump manoeuvred her client into a dressing room and then attacked her. The lawyer said Trump banged Carroll’s head against the wall, pinned her arms back with one hand, pulled her tights down with the other and then rammed his fingers into her vagina.

    Crowley said that Carroll kicked Trump and tried to knee him off but he was too strong for her.

    “He removed his hand and forced his penis inside her,” the lawyer told the jury.

    Crowley addressed what she said would be two of the biggest questions on the jurors minds. Why did Carroll go into the dressing room with Trump? And why didn’t she report the alleged rape to the police at the time?

    An artist’s drawing of the court proceedings.
    An artist’s drawing of the court proceedings. Photograph: Jane Rosenberg/Reuters

    The lawyer said that when Trump suggested Carroll try on a see-through bodysuit, she pushed it back at him and said he should be the one to try it on as it was his colour. Trump then took her by the arm and led Carroll to the dressing room.

    “To her, the situation was harmless and funny,” said Crowley. “The truth is she didn’t see Trump as a threat.”

    Crowley said that Carroll did tell two friends after the assault. One advised her to go to the police. The other said to keep quiet because Trump was a powerful man. Crowley said that Carroll was “filled with fear and shame” that kept her silent for decades.

    “In her mind, for many years, she thought what happened to her was her fault,” Crowley told the jury.

    When Carroll did decide to speak out after Trump’s election in 2016 and with the rise of the #MeToo movement, she faced a barrage of “vicious attacks” by the president.

    skip past newsletter promotion

    Crowley said that Trump’s deposition late last year will provide damning evidence against him. She noted that, in denying the alleged assault, the former president had said Carroll was not his type.

    “We all know what that means. He was saying she was too ugly to assault,” the lawyer told the jury.

    Crowley said that during the deposition, Trump was shown a photograph of himself meeting Carroll in the late 1980s. But he mistook the woman in the picture for his second wife, Marla Maples, who Crowley said was “very much his type”.

    Trump’s lawyer, Joseph Tacopina, ridiculed Carroll’s account and accused her of abusing the justice system to express her hate for the former president.

    “You learn that E Jean Carroll can’t tell you the date she claims to have been raped. She can’t tell you the month she claims to have been raped. She can’t tell you the season. She can’t even tell you the year,” he said, pointing out that the plaintiff has previously said it was 1995 or 1996.

    Tacopina told the jury that it was not believable that no one in a major department store saw Carroll and Trump together and that there were no staff in the area where the alleged assault took place. He also said that it was standard practice at Bergdorf Goodman to keep changing rooms locked until a customer asked to be let in and yet Carroll said the door was open.

    Tacopina questioned Carroll’s version of why she did not call the police.

    “E Jean Carroll once called the police on teenagers who vandalised her mailbox but not when she was violently raped,” he told the jury.

    Earlier, the jury of three women and six men was chosen from a pool of about 100 people who were questioned about whether they could set aside their political beliefs and views of the #MeToo movement to decide the case fairly.

    They were also asked if they supported Antifa, Jane’s Revenge, Redneck Revolt, the Ku Klux Klan or other extremist groups. Perhaps disappointingly for Trump and Carroll, no one in the jury pool said they followed them on social media or had read their columns or books. But nearly half had watched Trump presenting The Apprentice television programme.

    The trial continues.

    [ad_2]
    #Fear #shame #jury #hears #opening #arguments #Trump #civil #assault #trial
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )

  • Trial begins in civil lawsuit accusing Trump of rape

    Trial begins in civil lawsuit accusing Trump of rape

    [ad_1]

    trump legal troubles 86666

    “Trump was almost twice her size,” Crowley said to the jury. “He held down her arm, pulled down her tights and then he sexually assaulted her.”

    Trump, who isn’t required to appear at the proceedings, didn’t attend the first day of the trial. His lawyer, Joe Tacopina, sought to portray Carroll’s claim as a “sick story” while also trying to reassure jurors that they could side with his client even if they dislike him.

    “You can hate Donald Trump. It’s OK,” Tacopina told jurors. “But there’s a time and a secret place for that. It’s called a ballot box. Not here, in a court of law.”

    “While no one is above the law, no one is also beneath the law,” he continued. “Politicians don’t make this country great, jurors do.”

    Carroll, Tacopina argued, was motivated by money and by politics. He questioned her claim that no shoppers or employees were around to witness the incident in the department store, and he emphasized that she couldn’t recall certain details, most notably the precise timing of the alleged attack.

    “You learned that E. Jean Carroll can’t tell you the date. She can’t tell you the month. She can’t tell you the season. She can’t even tell you the year,” he said.

    “Evidence will tell you that E. Jean Carroll can’t do any of those things because the story isn’t true.”

    To combat some of those arguments, Crowley emphasized two main points in her opening statements: that Carroll’s account is corroborated by two friends she told contemporaneously and by former Bergdorf Goodman employees who can testify to physical attributes of the store at that time, and that Trump’s alleged assault of Carroll is part of a pattern. More than two dozen women have accused him of sexual misconduct.

    Two other women who have accused Trump of sexual assault, Jessica Leeds and Natasha Stynoff, are set to testify, and Carroll’s attorneys have received permission from the judge to use the “Access Hollywood” tape — in which Trump boasts on a hot mic that “When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything,” adding, “Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything” — as evidence at trial.

    Trump’s lawyer, Tacopina, dismissed the significance of the tape, calling it a “lewd conversation from 20 years ago.” The tape was recorded in 2005 and became public in 2016.

    “It’s foolish, but it’s locker room talk,” he said. “It’s not an admission.”

    Crowley also seized on a statement Trump made in disputing Carroll’s claims that Carroll is “not my type!”

    First, Crowley told the jury, “we all know what that means: He was saying she was too ugly to assault.”

    Later in her remarks, she also argued that his comment was not only offensive but also a lie. Describing a portion of his videotaped deposition that Carroll’s lawyers intend to show the jury, Crowley showed jurors a black and white photograph of Trump with Carroll.

    “When Trump was shown this photograph at his deposition late last year, he looked at it, he pointed to it, unprompted, and he said, ‘It’s Marla! Yeah, it’s Marla, my wife,’” Crowley said, raising her voice.

    “He mistook her for Marla Maples, his second wife, a former model, who he admitted was exactly his type.”

    The trial is expected to last between one and two weeks, and testimony is set to begin Wednesday. While Trump isn’t expected to attend the trial in coming days, the judge nevertheless offered an instruction that appeared aimed at the absent defendant.

    U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan, who in court filings took issue with Trump’s recent comments urging his supporters to protest criminal charges against him, advised the lawyers to warn their clients against making remarks that “inspire violence.”

    [ad_2]
    #Trial #begins #civil #lawsuit #accusing #Trump #rape
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Proud Boys leader a scapegoat for Trump, attorney tells January 6 trial

    Proud Boys leader a scapegoat for Trump, attorney tells January 6 trial

    [ad_1]

    A defense attorney argued on Tuesday at the close of a landmark trial over the January 6 insurrection that the US justice department is making the Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio a scapegoat for Donald Trump, whose supporters stormed the US Capitol.

    Tarrio and four lieutenants are charged with seditious conspiracy for what prosecutors say was a plot to stop the transfer of presidential power from Trump to Joe Biden after the 2020 election.

    In his closing argument, the defense lawyer Nayib Hassan noted Tarrio was not in Washington on 6 January 2021, having been banned from the capital after being arrested for defacing a Black Lives Matter banner. Trump, Hassan argued, was the one to blame for extorting supporters to “fight like hell” in his cause.

    “It was Donald Trump’s words,” Hassan told jurors in Washington federal court. “It was his motivation. It was his anger that caused what occurred on January 6 in your beautiful and amazing city. It was not Enrique Tarrio. They want to use Enrique Tarrio as a scapegoat for Donald J Trump and those in power.”

    Seditious conspiracy, a rarely used charge, carries a prison term of up to 20 years.

    Tarrio is one of the top targets of the federal investigation of the riot, which temporarily halted certification of Biden’s win.

    Tarrio’s lawyers have accused prosecutors of using him as a scapegoat because charging Trump or powerful allies would be too difficult. But his attorney’s closing arguments were the most full-throated expression of that strategy since the trial started more than three months ago.

    Trump has denied inciting violence on January 6 and has argued that he was permitted by the first amendment to challenge his loss to Biden. The former president faces several civil lawsuits over the riot and a special counsel is overseeing investigations into efforts by Trump and his allies to overturn the election.

    A prosecutor told jurors on Monday the Proud Boys were ready for “all-out war” and viewed themselves as foot soldiers for Trump.

    “These defendants saw themselves as Donald Trump’s army, fighting to keep their preferred leader in power no matter what the law or the courts had to say about it,” said Conor Mulroe.

    Tarrio, a Miami resident, is on trial with Ethan Nordean, Joseph Biggs, Zachary Rehl and Dominic Pezzola. Nordean, of Auburn, Washington, was a Proud Boys chapter president. Biggs, of Ormond Beach, Florida, was a self-described organizer. Rehl was president of a chapter in Philadelphia. Pezzola was a member from Rochester, New York.

    Attorneys for Nordean and Rehl gave closing arguments on Monday.

    Tarrio is accused of orchestrating the attack from afar. Police arrested him two days before the riot on charges that he burned a church banner during an earlier march. A judge ordered him to leave Washington after his arrest.

    Defense attorneys have argued that there is no evidence of a conspiracy or a plan for the Proud Boys to attack the Capitol. Tarrio “had no plan, no objective and no understanding of an objective”, his attorney said.

    Pezzola testified he never spoke to any of his co-defendants before they sat in the same courtroom. The defense attorney Steven Metcalf said Pezzola never knew of any plan for January 6 or joined any conspiracy.

    “It’s not possible. It’s fairy dust. It doesn’t exist,” Metcalf said.

    Mulroe, the prosecutor, told jurors a conspiracy can be an unspoken and implicit “mutual understanding, reached with a wink and a nod”.

    The foundation of the government’s case is a cache of messages Proud Boys leaders and members privately exchanged in encrypted chats and publicly posted on social media before, during and after the deadly January 6 attack.

    Norm Pattis, one of Biggs’s attorneys, described the Capitol riot as an “aberration” and told jurors their verdict “means so much more than January 6 itself” because it will “speak to the future”.

    “Show the world with this verdict that the rule of law is alive and well in the United States,” he said.

    The justice department has secured seditious conspiracy convictions against the founder and members of another far-right group, the Oath Keepers. But this is the first major trial involving leaders of the Proud Boys, a neo-fascist group that remains a force in mainstream Republican circles.

    [ad_2]
    #Proud #Boys #leader #scapegoat #Trump #attorney #tells #January #trial
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )

  • Tucker Carlson: firing highlights texts unearthed during Fox-Dominion trial

    Tucker Carlson: firing highlights texts unearthed during Fox-Dominion trial

    [ad_1]

    The $787.5m settlement between Fox News and Dominion Voting Systems spared executives and on-air talent from taking the stand in a defamation lawsuit that centered on the network airing false claims of a stolen election in the weeks after Donald Trump’s 2020 loss.

    The lawsuit still revealed plenty of what Fox personalities had been saying about the bogus election claims, including Tucker Carlson, the network’s top-rated host who was let go Monday. His unexplained departure has turned a spotlight on what he said in depositions, emails and text messages among the thousands of pages Dominion released in the leadup to jury selection in the case.

    Carlson’s messages lambasted the news division and management, revealed how he felt about Donald Trump and demonstrated his skepticism of the election lies – so much so that Fox attorneys and company founder Rupert Murdoch held him up as part of their defense of the company. The judge who oversaw the case ruled that it was “CRYSTAL clear” none of the election claims related to Dominion was true.

    Election lies

    “Sidney Powell is lying,” Carlson told a Fox News producer in a 16 November 2020, exchange before using expletives to describe Powell, an attorney representing Trump.

    “You keep telling our viewers that millions of votes were changed by the software. I hope you will prove that very soon,” Carlson wrote to Powell a day later. “You’ve convinced them that Trump will win. If you don’t have conclusive evidence of fraud at that scale, it’s a cruel and reckless thing to keep saying.” There was no indication that Powell replied.

    Fox attorneys noted that Carlson repeatedly questioned Powell’s claims in his broadcasts: “When we kept pressing, she got angry and told us to stop contacting her,” Carlson told viewers on 19 November 2020.

    Carlson told his audience that he had taken Powell seriously, but that she had never provided any evidence or demonstrated that the software Dominion used siphoned votes from Trump to Biden.

    Fox’s 2020 election coverage

    Fox viewers were outraged when the network called Arizona for Joe Biden on election night, a race call that was accurate. Fox executives and hosts began to worry about ratings as many of those viewers fled to other conservative outlets.

    “We worked really hard to build what we have. Those [expletive] are destroying our credibility. It enrages me,” Carlson said in a 6 November 2020, exchange with an unidentified person.

    On 8 November, after Biden was declared the winner, Carlson texted a couple of other employees: “Do the executives understand how much trust and credibility we’ve lost with our audience? We’re playing with fire, for real.”

    Later in the chain, as others bring up Newsmax as an emerging competitor, Carlson said, “With Trump behind it, an alternative like Newsmax could be devastating to us.”

    Donald Trump

    In a text exchange with an unknown person on 4 January 2021, Carlson expressed anger toward Trump. He said that “we are very, very close to being able to ignore Trump most nights” and that “I truly can’t wait.”

    Carlson said he had no doubt there was fraud in the 2020 election, but said Trump and his lawyers had so discredited their case – and media figures like himself – “that it’s infuriating. Absolutely enrages me.”

    Addressing Trump’s four years as president, Carlson said: “We’re all pretending we’ve got a lot to show for it, because admitting what a disaster it’s been is too tough to digest. But come on. There really isn’t an upside to Trump.”

    In texts early on the morning of 7 January 2021, a day after the violent assault on the US Capitol, Carlson and his longtime producer, Alex Pfeiffer, bemoaned how the rioters had believed Trump’s election lies.

    “They take the president literally,” Pfeiffer said. “He is to blame for everything that happened today.”

    “The problem is a little deeper than that I’d say,” Carlson replied.

    Later, Carlson writes of Trump: “He’s a demonic force, a destroyer. But he’s not going to destroy us. I’ve been thinking about this every day for four years.”

    Fox news department

    Some of the most heated vitriol was reserved for colleagues in the news division and included conversations with fellow on-air personalities Laura Ingraham and Sean Hannity.

    On 13 November, the week after the 2020 election, Ingraham, Carlson and Hannity got into a text message exchange in which they lambasted the news division. It began with Ingraham pointing out a tweet by correspondent Bryan Llenas, saying he had seen no evidence of widespread voter fraud in Pennsylvania.

    Carlson replied that Llenas had contacted him to apologize, then added “when has he ever ‘reported’ on anything”.

    Ingraham then names another colleague who indicated there was no fraud, with Hannity responding: “Guys I’ve been telling them for 4 years. News depart that breaks no news ever.” In a subsequent Twitter message seconds later, Hannity says, “They hate hate hate all three of us.”

    Ingraham responds she doesn’t “want to be liked by them” and Carlson chimes in, “They’re pathetic.” The conversation continues with Hannity bemoaning the damage that has been done to the brand: “In one week and one debate they destroyed a brand that took 25 years to build and the damage is incalculable.”

    Another text conversation by the trio three days later had Ingraham telling her colleagues that her anger at the news channel was “pronounced”, followed by an “lol”. In response, Carlson attacked two Fox anchors: “It should be. We devote our lives to building an audience and they let Chris Wallace and Leland [expletive] Vittert wreck it. Too much.” Wallace and Vittert have since left the network.

    The three hosts then started musing about a path forward after Ingraham says they have “enormous power” and that they should think about how, together, they can force a change. Carlson’s response: “For sure. The first thing we need to do exactly what we want to do. That’s the key. Leland Vittert seems to have the authority to do whatever he wants. We should too.”

    [ad_2]
    #Tucker #Carlson #firing #highlights #texts #unearthed #FoxDominion #trial
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )

  • Starting Tuesday, Trump will stand trial in a lawsuit accusing him of rape

    Starting Tuesday, Trump will stand trial in a lawsuit accusing him of rape

    [ad_1]

    And, of course, a civil verdict against Trump would add to his avalanche of legal troubles as he is seeking to regain the presidency while under indictment in an unrelated case and facing the possibility of additional criminal charges in several other investigations.

    The trial is also risky for Carroll, who must convince a jury to believe her accusation against an incredibly high-profile defendant for an incident that allegedly occurred nearly 30 years ago and lacked any eyewitnesses.

    According to Carroll, one night in either late 1995 or early 1996, she bumped into Trump while she was leaving Bergdorf Goodman. He recognized her, she said, because they had met once before and “had long traveled in the same New York City media circles.” Telling her that he was at the store to buy a present for “a girl,” Trump asked Carroll for her advice, and after the two discussed a few ideas, Trump suggested visiting the lingerie department, according to the lawsuit.

    There, on the counter, they saw a lilac gray see-through bodysuit, and the two teased each other about which one of them should try it on, the lawsuit says. According to Carroll, Trump then “grabbed” her arm, “maneuvered” her to the dressing room and closed the door. There were no attendants or other shoppers nearby, Carroll said.

    Once inside the dressing room, Trump pushed her up against the wall, bumping her head and “putting his mouth on her lips,” according to Carroll. After she pushed him back, she said, he “seized both of her arms,” pushed her again and then “jammed his hand under her coatdress and pulled down her tights.”

    After unzipping his pants, “Trump then pushed his fingers around Carroll’s genitals and forced his penis inside of her,” according to the lawsuit.

    After breaking free by raising up her knee and pushing him off, she said she ran out of Bergdorf’s and immediately called a friend, Lisa Birnbach, and told her about the incident. “He raped you,” Birnbach said, according to Carroll. Birnbach encouraged her to call the police, but “still in shock and reluctant to think of herself as a rape victim, Carroll did not want to speak to the police,” the lawsuit says.

    Several days later, Carroll says she disclosed the events to another friend, Carol Martin. Martin advised Carroll to tell no one, advice she says she took.

    Carroll’s attorneys have indicated they likely will call both Birnbach and Martin to testify. Both women backed up her account in media interviews shortly after Carroll went public with her claims in 2019.

    Trump, for his part, denies the entire episode. He said in 2019 that he had “never met this person in my life” and that she was manufacturing stories about him for the purpose of selling a book in which she detailed the alleged assault. Last year, he repeated the denials on his social media site and again accused her of promoting a “hoax,” adding that, “while I am not supposed to say it, I will. This woman is not my type!”

    In court filings, Trump’s attorneys have suggested that his defense may include questioning the plausibility of Carroll’s claim that there were no customers or staff around to witness the incident, drilling into the notion that she can’t pinpoint the date when the attack allegedly occurred and arguing that Carroll is politically and financially motivated.

    Lawyers for Carroll and Trump declined to comment.

    Carroll is suing him for sexual assault under the Adult Survivors Act, a 2022 New York law that gave a one-year window beginning in November of that year for people to sue their alleged assailants even if the statute of limitations had expired, which it had in Carroll’s case. In addition to the sexual-assault claim, Carroll is suing Trump in this week’s trial for defamation over his 2022 comments.

    In a separate lawsuit, she is also suing him for defamation regarding his 2019 comments; the trial for that case is delayed pending a ruling on whether Trump can be sued personally for comments he made while he was president.

    Civil lawsuits arising from sexual assaults are not uncommon. (Trump is not even the first president to be sued for sexual misconduct: Paula Jones famously sued Bill Clinton during his presidency for sexual harassment in a case that reached the Supreme Court.) But the Trump trial will require highly unusual measures. Perhaps most significantly, the judge presiding over the case, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan, has ordered an anonymous jury — meaning the names of the jurors will not be disclosed to the public or to Carroll, Trump or their attorneys — due to “a very strong risk that jurors will fear harassment.”

    In his order regarding the unusual step of protecting the juror’s identities, Kaplan, a Clinton appointee, cited a series of alleged threats of violence by Trump, his attacks on jurors in other cases, his encouragement of the Jan. 6, 2021 riot at the U.S. Capitol and his statement urging his supporters to protest what he predicted would be his arrest in connection with the district attorney’s investigation.

    In another twist, Trump has indicated that he probably won’t attend the trial. In a court filing, his lawyers cited the “logistical burdens” of him appearing in court due to his Secret Service protection, a wrinkle the judge rejected as an adequate reason for failing to appear, while noting that he has no legal obligation to either attend or testify.

    In other ways, however, the case is typical of sexual assault lawsuits. Such cases are commonly brought many years after the incident in question, because victims often take a long time to come to terms with what has happened to them, and often center on a situation witnessed by no one but the plaintiff and the defendant, said Peter Saghir, a lawyer who represented Anthony Rapp in his battery trial against Kevin Spacey, whom Rapp accused of making a “sexual advance” on him in 1986. (A jury found Spacey not liable for battery.)

    “These cases are so difficult because these events are almost always unwitnessed,” Saghir said. “I’m sure Trump is going to be arguing, clearly if I raped someone, why wasn’t she screaming? Why wasn’t she yelling? There’s no video. It doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen. It’s usually one person’s word against the other word.”

    In Carroll’s case, he noted, she does have corroboration from the two friends she says she told contemporaneously.

    Carroll’s case is also likely to hinge on her own testimony and whether a jury believes her story, said Jordan Merson, a lawyer who represents five women suing Bill Cosby for sexual abuse. “It seems like Trump’s legal team is going after her credibility, so her cross examination when she’s on the witness stand is going to be a very important part of the case.”

    Merson noted that cross examination for a sexual assault victim can be “very difficult” because the plaintiff is being challenged on something they typically find painful to talk about under even the most inviting circumstances.

    If the jury does believe Carroll’s story about the alleged rape, Merson said the defamation claim may significantly boost any monetary award she is given. Carroll is seeking unspecified damages — and for Trump to retract the statement he made about her on his social media site.

    “Juries tend to be very sympathetic to survivors of sexual abuse, especially if there’s any type of verbal disparagement thereafter,” Merson said. “If the jury finds for Ms. Carroll, you could be looking at a very significant damages award,” he said. “Many millions of dollars.”

    [ad_2]
    #Starting #Tuesday #Trump #stand #trial #lawsuit #accusing #rape
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Your guide to the upcoming trial in E. Jean Carroll v. Donald Trump

    Your guide to the upcoming trial in E. Jean Carroll v. Donald Trump

    [ad_1]

    trump columnist lawsuit 18418

    E. Jean Carroll is a writer who was an advice columnist for Elle Magazine for many years. She alleges that Donald Trump sexually assaulted her in a dressing room of luxury department store Bergdorf Goodman in the mid-1990s. In her lawsuit, she says Trump attacked her inside a dressing room in the lingerie department, where he “seized both of her arms” and then “jammed his hand under her coatdress and pulled down her tights.” After unzipping his pants, “Trump then pushed his fingers around Carroll’s genitals and forced his penis inside of her,” according to the lawsuit.

    What does Trump say about her accusations?

    Trump says the incident “never happened” and that Carroll’s allegation is fabricated. He said in 2019 that he had “never met this person in my life” and that she was motivated to make up the claim against him in order to sell a book in which she described the alleged assault. Last year on his social media site, he again accused her of promoting a “hoax” and said that, “while I am not supposed to say it, I will. This woman is not my type!”

    What is Carroll asking for?

    Carroll is asking for unspecified damages for battery and defamation and for Trump to retract the 2022 statement he made on his social media site.

    Why isn’t this a criminal case?

    Carroll never contacted the police at the time of the alleged incident and, according to her, told only two friends about it before going public with her claims decades later, in 2019. By that point, the criminal statute of limitations had expired long ago.

    How can Carroll sue over an incident that took place more than two decades ago? What about the statute of limitations?

    The statute of limitations for people to bring civil lawsuits over sexual assault in New York is generally three years. But in 2022, New York passed the Adult Survivors Act, which opened a one-year window — from Nov. 24, 2022, to Nov. 24, 2023 — for people to sue their alleged assailants even if the statute of limitations had expired. Carroll filed her lawsuit within minutes of the law taking effect on Nov. 24, 2022.

    Will Trump testify?

    It’s unlikely. Carroll hasn’t indicated she will call him as a witness. He could testify in his own defense, but his lawyers have indicated he is unlikely to attend the trial. He was deposed in this case, so lawyers for both Carroll and Trump can use his deposition as evidence.

    Is there any chance of an out-of-court settlement?

    Lawyers for Carroll and Trump haven’t indicated in court filings that there has been any discussion of an out-of-court settlement. Such an outcome is always possible, however, even at the last minute, as evidenced by the recent settlement between Dominion Voting Systems and Fox News. That agreement was announced the day opening statements were set to begin in the defamation trial.

    Is anyone paying for Carroll’s legal fees?

    Reid Hoffman, the co-founder of LinkedIn, is helping pay for Carroll’s lawsuit, according to court filings. Hoffman, a major Democratic donor, has helped pay for “certain costs and fees,” said Carroll’s lawyers, who added that their client wasn’t involved in obtaining outside funding. Trump’s lawyers sought to delay the trial after they learned of the third-party funding, saying it raised questions about her credibility and motivations. The judge didn’t allow a delay, but did permit them to question Carroll about the financing.

    How long will the trial last?

    Lawyers for Carroll and Trump have indicated in court filings that they believe the trial will last between one and two weeks.

    Will the trial be televised?

    No. The trial is in federal court, which doesn’t permit cameras.

    [ad_2]
    #guide #upcoming #trial #Jean #Carroll #Donald #Trump
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Faith lifted Pittsburgh Jews in long wait for massacre trial

    Faith lifted Pittsburgh Jews in long wait for massacre trial

    [ad_1]

    On Monday, jury selection is scheduled to begin in the long-delayed trial of the suspect, accused of dozens of charges including hate crimes resulting in death.

    The three congregations are wary of what’s to come. Some members may be called to testify, and they’re bracing for graphic evidence and testimony that could revive the traumas of the attack on Oct. 27, 2018 — often referred to around here as simply 10/27.

    The tension can be felt in private conversations and encounters — the griefs, the anxieties, the feelings of being in a media fishbowl.

    But each in their own ways, members are finding renewed purpose in honoring those lost in the attack, in the bold practice of their faith, in activism on issues like gun violence and immigration, in taking a stand against antisemitism and other forms of bigotry.

    “We don’t want to be silenced as Jews,” said Rich Weinberg, chair of the social action committee for Dor Hadash. “We want to be active as Jews with an understanding of Jewish values. … We are going to still be here. We will not be intimidated.”

    That was evident even in subtle details of a Passover service held earlier this month in New Light’s chapel, joined by some members of Dor Hadash.

    Some offering Yizkor, or remembrance, prayers were doing so in honor of slain loved ones. One prayer was read in memory of the “Kedoshim of Pittsburgh, murdered al kiddush Hashem” — holy martyrs, killed while sanctifying God’s name. The prayer, modeled on prayers for Jewish martyrs of medieval Europe, has been woven into the ritual fabric of Jewish Pittsburgh.

    One of those leading Passover prayers was Carol Black, who survived the attack that claimed the life of her brother, Richard Gottfried, and two other New Light members, Melvin Wax and Daniel Stein. They had led much of New Light’s ritual worship.

    “Rich and Dan and Mel were our religious heart,” said Stephen Cohen, co-president of New Light. “And we had some very big shoes to fill.”

    Members such as Black and Bruce Hyde have stepped into them. Hyde said when he once read a passage that had been read by Stein, he felt his presence: “He was up there with me.”

    Cohen said the congregation had three priorities after the attack: to memorialize those lost, to continue their ritual life and to further religious education. New Light, like Tree of Life, is part of the moderate Conservative denomination of Judaism.

    The congregation dedicated a monument honoring its three martyrs — shaped with images of Torah scrolls and prayer shawls — at its cemetery, where it also created a chapel adorned with stained glass windows and other mementos honoring the victims.

    New Light Co-President Barbara Caplan said her dream for the congregation is “that we have many more years of Friday night services, Saturday morning services, holidays together, where we just go on being the family that we are.”

    Cohen said the congregation has been overwhelmed by support from Christian, Sikh and other communities and wanted to build on those relationships. It has held Bible studies with local Black churches, and members visited the Mother Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina, drawing solace from a congregation that lost nine members to a racist gunman in 2015. “I’ve never been part of a group hug of a hundred people,” Cohen recalled.

    All three of the modest-sized congregations have been meeting in nearby synagogues since the attack closed the Tree of Life building.

    Rabbi Jeffrey Myers had been leading Tree of Life Congregation for just over a year when he survived 10/27. He carries the scarred memories of the gunshots that killed seven members: Joyce Fienberg, Rose Mallinger, Cecil and David Rosenthal, Bernice and Sylvan Simon and Irving Younger. Andrea Wedner, Mallinger’s daughter, was wounded in the attack.

    Myers continues to speak forcefully against the bigotry behind it.

    His mission is “primarily to help my congregation community heal,” Myers said. “But beyond it is to speak up, to be a voice, to say, ‘No, this isn’t okay. It’s not acceptable. It never was. And it can never be.’”

    He’d like to think the trial will expose the dangers of rising bigotry, but “it takes a concerted effort to be able to … walk a mile in someone else’s shoes,” he said. But it affects more than Jews. ”Someone who is an antisemite is most likely also the possessor of a long laundry list of personal grievances and other groups that that person does not like.”

    Members are each recovering in their own ways, congregation president Alan Hausman said.

    Each week when he makes announcements, Hausman said he includes this one: “It’s OK not to be OK, and we will get through this together.”

    On Sunday, the day before jury selection, the Tree of Life Congregation is having a closure ceremony for its historic building. The congregation and a partner organization plan a major overhaul of the site, which will combine worship space with a memorial and antisemitism education, including about the Holocaust.

    “We’re not really leaving, we will be back,” said Hausman.

    “Hopefully we’ll be once again a happy, grounded, 160-year-old congregation,” added member Audrey Glickman, a survivor. “Back to being a solid group of people who come together regularly and do our thing.”

    Dor Hadash, founded 60 years ago, is Pittsburgh’s only congregation in the progressive Reconstructionist movement of Judaism. Many members are drawn to its interlocking focuses on worship, study and social activism.

    It was that activism that appears to have drawn the shooting suspect — who fulminated online against HIAS, a Jewish refugee resettlement agency — to the address where Dor Hadash met. The congregation was listed on HIAS’ website as a participant in a National Refugee Shabbat, which wove concern for migrants into Sabbath worship.

    On 10/27, members Jerry Rabinowitz and Dan Leger were gathering for a Torah study when they heard the gunshots and ran to help. Rabinowitz was killed, and Leger seriously wounded.

    But the attack has only emboldened Dor Hadash members.

    They were soon organizing what became a separate group, Squirrel Hill Stands Against Gun Violence, advocating for gun safety legislation. And they redoubled their support for immigrants, refugees and their helpers such as HIAS. The congregation has sponsored a refugee family originally from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. And they have taken a strong stand against rising antisemitism and white supremacy.

    “I think advocacy has been a huge part of our healing,” said Dana Kellerman, communications chair for Dor Hadash. Advocacy “isn’t just about making myself feel better,” she added. “It is about trying to move the needle so that this doesn’t happen to somebody else.”

    The congregation has been growing since the attack, said its president, Jo Recht. The historically lay-led congregation has hired its first staff rabbi, Amy Bardack. Her formal installation is this Sunday — a date that wasn’t specifically chosen in advance of the trial but that provides a welcome occasion of celebration.

    “There are a lot of people who are seeking some way to help so that the world is a more compassionate place,” Recht said.

    [ad_2]
    #Faith #lifted #Pittsburgh #Jews #long #wait #massacre #trial
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Jeff Sessions, testifying at trial of hip hop artist, details high-level deportation discussions

    Jeff Sessions, testifying at trial of hip hop artist, details high-level deportation discussions

    [ad_1]

    Prosecutors contend that Michel — who became famous in the 1990s as a member of the Fugees trio — engaged in the international intrigue behind the charges after running short on cash from his music. They say he received $88 million between 2012 and 2017 from Jho Low, a Malaysian businessperson suspected of looting that country’s 1MDB sovereign wealth fund.

    Michel’s defense team has argued that he wasn’t acting as an agent for Low or China in his effort to arrange the swap, but acting for humanitarian reasons to aid American citizens and residents who were in distress.

    Under questioning by Michel’s attorney David Kenner, Sessions told jurors about a pair of high-level meetings where officials discussed the potential deportation of Guo, who eventually became a close associate of Trump adviser Steve Bannon.

    “I remember there was a meeting at the State Department. I believe Homeland Security and the Department of Justice were there – in their conference room,” the former attorney general said.

    Sessions also detailed efforts by a Chinese vice minister for public security, Sun Lijun, to arrange a meeting with him to discuss the possibility of deporting Guo. Prosecutors have alleged that Sun was Michel’s contact in the Chinese government and the person urging Michel to try to broker a deal.

    “I’m aware that we had a request from the [Chinese] ambassador to meet … that I join and meet with Mr. Sun,” Sessions said.

    However, Sessions said he ultimately declined to meet with the Chinese security official. He also said the proposal to deport Guo never proceeded on his watch. Guo was not deported, but he was indicted and arrested last month on charges he perpetrated a billion-dollar fraud scheme. He has pleaded not guilty.

    The 76-year-old former attorney general and senator, who spent more than 12 years as U.S. attorney in Alabama and was an unsuccessful nominee for the federal bench during the Reagan administration, was not able to shed much light on Michel’s activities.

    “I don’t recall ever having met him,” Sessions said after Michel stood and removed his face mask.

    Prosecutors have argued that Michel used various intermediaries, including a DOJ lawyer named George Higginbotham and Republican fundraiser Elliott Broidy, to try to advance the swap and to try to shut down the Justice Department’s investigation into Low’s role in 1MDB.

    The key point Kenner appeared to gain during Sessions’ brief tour on the stand Tuesday was the former attorney general’s observation that there was nothing obviously improper about approaching the attorney general’s office or the Justice Department to seek deportation of someone wanted in a foreign country.

    “I think that’s an appropriate action, although the State Department would have an important role to play in that and others, perhaps Homeland Security, since this figure was important to China,” Sessions said.

    Sessions also testified that he was aware of efforts to get some U.S. citizens out of China, including a pregnant woman who was being denied an exit visa. “We felt she was being improperly detained,” he said.

    Prosecutors passed up their chance to cross-examine their former boss. “No questions,” prosecutor Sean Mulryne said.

    The trial of Michel, 50, is in its fourth week. The defense kicked off its case on Monday with an opening statement deferred from the outset of the trial. Kenner told jurors in detail about Michel’s history as a successful performer, emphasized that any lobbying his client did was legal and insisted he had no knowledge that he might be required to register as a foreign agent, NBC News reported.

    [ad_2]
    #Jeff #Sessions #testifying #trial #hip #hop #artist #details #highlevel #deportation #discussions
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Judge in Proud Boys trial rejects claims of government misconduct

    Judge in Proud Boys trial rejects claims of government misconduct

    [ad_1]

    capitol breach extremist plots 20085

    “Pezzola has not shown how any of this relates to an element of an offense with which he is charged — or how it relates to him at all,” Kelly wrote, adding, “Nor has the evidence been suppressed. As the Court has already explained to Pezzola, he cannot base a [suppression] claim on information he has long possessed.”

    As the trial of five Proud Boys — including former national chairman Enrique Tarrio — inches toward a conclusion this week, Kelly sidelined several of the most sensational allegations that Pezzola’s attorneys had lodged. Among them: that prosecutors had destroyed evidence related to the case, that they coerced false guilty pleas from other Proud Boys and that they doctored at least one report from an informant to obscure an FBI agent’s involvement.

    Kelly summed up his response to these claims in a section of his order headlined: “There Is No Evidence of Government Misconduct, Let Alone Misconduct Warranting Dismissal, a Mistrial, or Other Sanctions,”

    Kelly described Pezzola’s theories as “bizarre,” based on “conjecture” and other times not based on anything at all.

    “At bottom, not one of Pezzola’s contentions withstands scrutiny,” Kelly wrote. “His factual premises lack support, and his legal premises cannot be squared with case law.”

    In his order, Kelly also rejected claims that prosecutors had improperly withheld key evidence in the case by claiming it was classified. The Justice Department worked frantically to reclaim 80 lines of internal FBI messages that it had inadvertently provided to the defense lawyers in the case, saying they were never meant to be turned over and were likely classified. The effort prompted defense lawyers to raise questions about whether prosecutors were seeking to seal away significant exculpatory evidence under the guise of a classification issue.

    Kelly rejected this speculation in his order, contending that they had no bearing on the defense’s case at all.

    “The Court has reviewed the 80 messages produced to it in camera and finds — regardless of whether they were properly classified or even properly categorized as law-enforcement sensitive — that the Government had no duty to produce them to the defendants in the first place,” he wrote.

    [ad_2]
    #Judge #Proud #Boys #trial #rejects #claims #government #misconduct
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Judge delays trial over Fox News and 2020 election lies

    Judge delays trial over Fox News and 2020 election lies

    [ad_1]

    Claire Bischoff, a Dominion spokesperson, said the company would have no comment on the trial delay. Representatives for Fox News and its parent company, Fox Corp., the entities Dominion is suing, did not immediately return requests for comment. In his statement, Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis said only that the trial, including jury selection, would be continued until Tuesday and that he would announce the delay in court on Monday.

    That’s when Fox News executives and the network’s star hosts were scheduled to begin answering for their role in spreading doubt about the 2020 presidential election and creating the gaping wound that remains in America’s democracy.

    Jurors hearing the $1.6 billion lawsuit filed against Fox by Dominion Voting Systems would have to answer a specific question: Did Fox defame the voting machine company by airing bogus stories alleging that the election was rigged against then-President Donald Trump, even as many at the network privately doubted the false claims being pushed by Trump and his allies?

    Yet the broader context looms large. A trial would test press freedom and the reputation of conservatives’ favorite news source. It also would illuminate the flow of misinformation that helped spark the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol and continues to fuel Trump’s hopes to regain power in 2024.

    Fox News stars Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity and founder Rupert Murdoch are among the people who had been expected to testify.

    Barring a settlement, opening statements are now scheduled for Tuesday.

    “This is Christmas Eve for defamation scholars,” said RonNell Andersen Jones, a University of Utah law professor.

    If the trial were a sporting event, Fox News would be taking the field on a losing streak, with key players injured and having just alienated the referee. Pretrial court rulings and embarrassing revelations about its biggest names have Fox on its heels.

    Court papers released over the past two months show Fox executives, producers and personalities privately disbelieved Trump’s claims of a fraudulent election. But Dominion says Fox News was afraid of alienating its audience with the truth, particularly after many viewers were angered by the network’s decision to declare Democrat Joe Biden the winner in Arizona on election night in November 2020.

    Some rulings by the judge have eased Dominion’s path. In a summary judgment, Davis said it was “CRYSTAL clear” that fraud allegations against the company were false. That means trial time won’t have to be spent disproving them at a time when millions of Republicans continue to doubt the 2020 results.

    Davis said it also is clear that Dominion’s reputation was damaged, but that it would be up to a jury to decide whether Fox acted with “actual malice” — the legal standard — and, if so, what that’s worth financially.

    Fox witnesses would likely testify that they thought the allegations against Dominion were newsworthy, but Davis made it clear that’s not a defense against defamation.

    New York law protects news outlets from defamation for expressions of opinion. But Davis methodically went through 20 different times on Fox when allegations against Dominion were discussed, ruling that all of them were fully or partly considered statements of fact, and fair game for a potential libel finding.

    “A lawsuit is a little bit like hitting a home run,” said Cary Coglianese, law professor at the University of Pennsylvania. “You have to go through all of the bases to get there.” The judge’s rulings “basically give Dominion a spot at third base, and all they have to do is come home to win it.”

    Both Fox and Dominion are incorporated in Delaware, though Fox News is headquartered in New York and Dominion is based in Denver.

    Fox angered Davis this past week when the judge said the network’s lawyers delayed producing evidence and were not forthcoming in revealing Murdoch’s role at Fox News. A Fox lawyer, Blake Rohrbacher, sent a letter of apology to Davis on Friday, saying it was a misunderstanding and not an intention to deceive.

    It’s not clear whether that would affect a trial. But it’s generally not wise to have a judge wonder at the outset of a trial whether your side is telling the truth, particularly when truth is the central point of the case, Jones said.

    The lawsuit essentially comes down to whether Dominion can prove Fox acted with actual malice by putting something on the air knowing that it was false or acting with a “reckless disregard” for whether it was true. In most libel cases, that is the most difficult hurdle for plaintiffs to get past.

    Dominion can point to many examples where Fox figures didn’t believe the charges being made by Trump allies such as Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani. But Fox says many of those disbelievers were not in a position to decide when to air those allegations.

    “We think it’s essential for them to connect those dots,” Fox lawyer Erin Murphy said.

    If the case goes to trial, the jury will determine whether a powerful figure like Murdoch — who testified in a deposition that he didn’t believe the election-fraud charges — had the influence to keep the accusations off the air.

    “Credibility is always important in any trial in any case. But it’s going to be really important in this case,” said Jane Kirtley, director of the Silha Center for the Study of Media Ethics and the Law at the University of Minnesota.

    Kirtley is concerned that the suit may eventually advance to the U.S. Supreme Court, which could use it as a pretext to weaken the actual malice standard that was set in a 1964 decision in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. That, she feels, would be disastrous for journalists.

    Dominion’s lawsuit is being closely watched by another voting-technology company with a separate but similar case against Fox News. Florida-based Smartmatic has looked to some rulings and evidence in the Dominion case to try to enhance its own $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit in New York. The Smartmatic case isn’t yet ready for trial but has survived Fox News’ effort to get it tossed out.

    Many experts are surprised Fox and Dominion have not reached an out-of-court settlement, though they can at any time. There’s presumably a wide financial gulf. In court papers, Fox contends the $1.6 billion damages claim is a wild overestimate.

    Dominion’s motivation may also be to inflict maximum embarrassment on Fox with the peek into the network’s internal communications following the election. Text messages from January 2021 revealed Carlson telling a friend that he passionately hated Trump and couldn’t wait to move on.

    Dominion may also seek an apology.

    The trial has had no apparent effect on Fox News’ viewership; it remains the top-rated cable network. And there is little indication that the case has changed Fox’s editorial direction. Fox has embraced Trump once again in recent weeks following the former president’s indictment by a Manhattan grand jury, and Carlson presented an alternate history of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, based on tapes given to him by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

    [ad_2]
    #Judge #delays #trial #Fox #News #election #lies
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )