oski003 said:
concordtom said:
oski003 said:
For those without reading comprehension issues...
What is the rationale for allowing someone to sue for a tort that allegedly happened to an adult more than 20 years ago? How many jurors must agree with the plaintiff in this case?
Do your own research.
You're more than capable.
You know the issues at hand.
Why not just come out and say it:
"I, oski003, believe that Donald Trump should not be held to account for his rape of E Jean Carroll - by whatever means necessary, be it statute of limitations has run out OR 1 single juror who can put his foot down and say NO no matter how damning the evidence is."
Since all I am hearing is crickets, there appears to be no rationale to allow this suit to move forward. TDS isn't a valid reason. Are you saying the evidence is damning? What evidence? Testimony from the victim? It is very tough to prove or disprove something that happened 30+ years ago. How many jurors must vote him guilty? What is the burden of proof?
In federal civil cases, a verdict must be unanimous.
The burden of proof is "by a preponderance of the evidence."
Her testimony alone constitutes eyewitness evidence that could satisfy the burden of proof in the opinion of the jurors.
It will not be a "he said/she said" situation because "he" is not only not going to testify, he isn't showing up.
Stale claim. Unanimous verdict required. It is going to be tough for her not to lose at least one juror.
I believe her. tRump not testifying in a civil case or even showing up is not how most innocent people would act. I have read 10 books about him, and now will not read past a headline about him. I think he is "good for it" as Detective Andy Sipowicz, NYPD used to say.
Donald Trump sexual misconduct allegations - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
“I love Cal deeply. What are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”