movielover said:

---

She can't even recall the year the alleged attack happened in a public dressing room in midday, can't recall the exact date, details, etc. A story which mirrors a TV episode.

Why can't she name the date? Previous accusers have fabricated allegations, and Trump's extensive work schedule and witnesses debunk their fabrications.

Don't name a date, and it can't be debunked with work records and witnesses.

---

I know that this must be totally foreign to you, but being unable to recall when a traumatic event occurred is common with victims.

The jury did not require a date.

Duh.

"This case was incredibly shaky."

Well, that call was for the jury.

"One of the primary reasons SOLs exist is to ensure the reliability of the evidence."

The Catholic Church in the United States has spent more than $5 billion in settlements, legal fees, and other costs related to child sexual abuse allegations over the past two decades. Almost all paid on cases where the statute of limitations had long expired but reopened by state legislation.

bearister said:

---

"This case was incredibly shaky."

Well, that call was for the jury.

"One of the primary reasons SOLs exist is to ensure the reliability of the evidence."

The Catholic Church in the United States has spent more than $5 billion in settlements, legal fees, and other costs related to child sexual abuse allegations over the past two decades. Almost all paid on cases where the statute of limitations had long expired but reopened by state legislation.

---

This was pretty unique.

In 2022, Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York signed the Adults Survivors Act. This legislation allowed a temporary one-year look-back window in which adult survivors of sexual assault could file lawsuits against their assailants, regardless of when the assault occurred.

Unlike child sec abuse, where it is generally accepted that the SOL on child sexual abuse doesn't toll until the children have reached adulthood because that is when they are expected to have adult cognitive ability and responsibility.

ACC Bear said:

---

I wouldn't **** E. Jean Carroll with bearister's dick

---

Donald Trump sexual misconduct allegations - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations

When you can get evidence of other sexual assaults into evidence it is "party over" time for defendant. E. Jean Carroll was only allowed to get two priors in but it was enough. Some judges let more in.

In Clarence Thomas' Confirmation Hearing multiple harassment victims were willing to testify against him but Sleepy Joe kept said evidence out. Biden gave Republicans the gift that keeps giving by clearing the path for Thomas.

ACC Bear said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

movielover said:

---

She can't even recall the year the alleged attack happened in a public dressing room in midday, can't recall the exact date, details, etc. A story which mirrors a TV episode.

Why can't she name the date? Previous accusers have fabricated allegations, and Trump's extensive work schedule and witnesses debunk their fabrications.

Don't name a date, and it can't be debunked with work records and witnesses.

---

I know that this must be totally foreign to you, but being unable to recall when a traumatic event occurred is common with victims.

The jury did not require a date.

Duh.

---

And the law was created to allow Carroll to sue Trump well after the previous SOL. One of the primary reasons SOLs exist is to ensure the reliability of the evidence. This case was incredibly shaky.

---

I wouldn't **** E. Jean Carroll with bearister's dick

---

She was pretty cute back then, reminds me of the blonde in Cheers, Diane.

She's also a bit nuts.

ACC Bear said:

---

I wouldn't **** E. Jean Carroll with bearister's dick

---

You sound like one of those internet "tough" guys more and more with each passing day.

New York Times said with 'diversity' Civic measures drop.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOI7AdYEl9O/?igsh=MTQyejlhaXd2bWJvNQ==

So now you're quoting a study by a Harvard political scientist in the NY Times?

After quoting an Op Ed in the WSJ today?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA!

You're hilarious.

movielover said:

---

New York Times said with 'diversity' Civic measures drop.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOI7AdYEl9O/?igsh=MTQyejlhaXd2bWJvNQ==

---

That's a bunch of horse*****

Do humans naturally distrust any sort of difference with other humans? Sure. But that's because humans suck, not because diversity is the problem. The point of diversity is for humans to get the **** over it and learn to look at other humans as humans rather than to focus on what makes them different from you. There are plenty of ****ty white people out there that I want nothing to do with.

Where diversity goes off the rails is when it's enforced or when it supplants merit in merit-based situations, which is what the ****ty-ass Democrats were doing with it to pander for votes. Fortunately for the country, most non-white people can see through the pandering that white Democrats do to them and abandoned their ****ty party.

BTW, Visegrad24 sucks, is a propaganda account, and should be ignored by everybody.

Cal88 said:

---

ACC Bear said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

movielover said:

---

She can't even recall the year the alleged attack happened in a public dressing room in midday, can't recall the exact date, details, etc. A story which mirrors a TV episode.

Why can't she name the date? Previous accusers have fabricated allegations, and Trump's extensive work schedule and witnesses debunk their fabrications.

Don't name a date, and it can't be debunked with work records and witnesses.

---

I know that this must be totally foreign to you, but being unable to recall when a traumatic event occurred is common with victims.

The jury did not require a date.

Duh.

---

And the law was created to allow Carroll to sue Trump well after the previous SOL. One of the primary reasons SOLs exist is to ensure the reliability of the evidence. This case was incredibly shaky.

---

I wouldn't **** E. Jean Carroll with bearister's dick

---

She was pretty cute back then, reminds me of the blonde in Cheers, Diane.

She's also a bit nuts.

---

They wouldn't allow this interview to be played at the trial