On the evening of January 16, former President Donald Trump faces E. Jean Carroll for a second defamation trial. This case follows a previous trial in which a jury found Trump liable for defamation and sexual abuse, awarding Carroll $5 million in damages. This time, however, the central question for the jury is how substantial the check Trump must cut to the advice columnist.
In the original trial, Trump’s lawyer Joseph Tacopina managed to lead jurors to the conclusion that Trump might have only penetrated Carroll with his hand, rather than more serious sexual assault, during the reported incident in a department store dressing room. The jury concluded that Trump was liable for sexual abuse, but not rape. Despite this result, Judge Lewis Kaplan has repeatedly clarified and reaffirmed that while this form of assault may not meet the statutory definition of rape in New York, it does meet the colloquial definition.
Throughout these proceedings, Trump’s attorney Michael Madaio has continued to file motions presupposing possibly inaccurate conclusions to the case. Just on the preceding Friday night, Madaio attempted to challenge an evidentiary motion put forth by Carroll’s lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, claiming arguments in favor of Carroll’s account of being raped.
In his response, Madaio suggested that the initial ruling that Trump did not rape Carroll would imply that any damage Carroll suffered was due to her allegations against Trump and not his refutations. He insisted the jury’s findings support this argument but the court appears less than convinced.
Trump spent the past weekend voicing complaints about his inability to inform jurors that Carroll once owned a cat named “Vagina,” among other claims.
Carroll v. Trump I and Carroll v. Trump II are both publicly accessible for further reading on the proceedings and rebuttals.