Why didn't the judge in the E Jean Carroll trial not want these tweets by Carroll

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Looking at the situation from across the Atlantic, my understanding of the system is that they were totally irrelevant to the matter being considered ...

Trump had already been found guilty of sexual molestation at his earlier trial ...

This trial was not concerned with reviewing a case which had already been tried but was concerned about setting punitive amounts of money to compensate the damage caused...

Slade · 56-60, M

@EnglishLitLover never convicted or "found guilty"

EnglishLitLover · 56-60, M

I thought he was found guilty of sexual assault at his previous trial?

If not, what [b]was[/b] the verdict at that trial?@Slade

Slade · 56-60, M

@EnglishLitLover A civil not a criminal trial

🙄

EnglishLitLover · 56-60, M

but he was found guilty of sexually molesting a woman ... wasn't he .... or did European news outlets get that wrong??@Slade

Slade · 56-60, M

@EnglishLitLover Wrong. It was a civil judgement that almost certainly will be overturned

EnglishLitLover · 56-60, M

So there was no jury decision? European papers surely can't have got that wrong ... which means it was a court decision by a jury and not an arbitrary one-person judgement ... and looking into the case further ... perhaps your belief that there is 'certainty' in it being overturned appears to be misplaced .... maybe the reporting you have been reading is inaccurate?@Slade

Slade · 56-60, M

@EnglishLitLover it was a civil not criminal trial. You can't be convicted or "found guilty" in a civil trial

EnglishLitLover · 56-60, M

Ah I see it's a terminological nicety ... so in court, the jury found him "liable for sexual battery" .... I accept what you're saying but reckon most sensible people wiki interpret that as guilty of the accusation that he sexually molested .... though to be honest it's just a matter of semantics lol@Slade

Slade · 56-60, M

@EnglishLitLover no it's hardly semantics. One court can take your money and the other can take your liberty or even life. The burden of proof, rightfully, is much, much higher in a criminal charge. Hardly a terminological nicety

So can the passive aggressive snark

MasterLee · 56-60, M

@Slade similar to OJ Simpson. He wasn't guilty so they went civil.

Slade · 56-60, M

@MasterLee Yes. Burden of proof far lower in a civil court

MasterLee · 56-60, M

@Slade preponderance of evidence can indict a ham sandwich.

Slade · 56-60, M

@MasterLee just means you guess there could be a chance...