I’ve been reading a little about this case, here, on Twitter and even in my local newspaper. I’ve ben wondering how a 30 year old case can go to court.
But it hasn’t, has it? Trump is not accused of rape, but rather of defamation, for saying Carrol is a liar. Or am I wrong?
So it is defamation to call someone a liar? The lawsuits Trump could start is endless…
From what I can understand, NY made a law for 2023 only that allows victims of sexual assault to sue their abusers outside of the normal statute of limitations window. I believe she sued Trump for defamation because he said something about her (I'm not sure what) while he was in the White House and couldn't be sued. Now that he is not in the White House she started up the defamation suit, which took 2+ years to make it to court. In the recent past when the law was changed in NY she added the assault lawsuit.
I don't know how a law like that can be made for 1 year, and retroactive, but I'm sure that will be challenged.
IF the judge and lawyer were impartial there would be very little chance of her winning the assault part because the woman can't even remember which year it supposedly happened, and it appears that her case mimics a Law and Order tv show case about a rape in the same store. There are questions about the timeline on that and I have no idea because I'm a guy. Law and Order and all the variants are all about the guy being a POS, and it is all depression all the time.
Trump's lawyer motioned for dismissal but the (Clinton appointed) judge denied it. The trial is going on. Should be open and shut since there is zero evidence, she can't remember which year, and she has recently said on TV that rape is sexy. She also is pretty mental - she painted the trees and rocks along a stream in her back yard/woods the color blue. Why not...
So - it appears it is both a defamation and a sexual abuse trial, but both are civil suits and not criminal. I think the law change only allows civil suits.
Sorry if I got any of this wrong but this is what was able to piece together today with OAN on in the background while I was trying to work.
That makes sense in regards to the reporting about the case. In regards to reality it of course makes no sense. I love this movie. 😁
See Constitution.
Ex post facto law for sure, but this might even come under bill of attainder since it involves property.