"Found guilty" is inaccurate, since he was not charged with it as a crime. Rather, it was a finding of fact in a civil case. The standards of evidence are different, and a criminal prosecution would still have to prove the charge to a higher standard. But for purposes of civil liability, yeah, he did it.
post
Found guilty
Technically not, and this is an important distinction because the level of evidence required for a civil case is less than that of a criminal case.
He has been found civilly liable for something legally distinct from rape
Didn't she say that she wasn't sure if it was his penis or his fingers and that's why in NY they couldn't call it rape.
Which is ridiculous because it's rape whichever he used.
Few more explanatory quotes - https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/07/donald-trump-rape-language-e-jean-carroll
Article says the jury found trump liable for digital(fingers) penetration, but not for irrefutable non-consensual penetration using his penis, which is the only way to legally be found liable for "rape" in NY.
I have not watched or read a transcript of the trial yet, this is a true TIL.
I cannot imagine the ordeal for the victim when a bunch of folks in suits discusses if someone forced his dick inside of you or "just" his fingers...
By any other name, would he still be a creep.
Yes, the answer is yes.
Not a convict because it was a civil case rather than criminal, trump is still a rapist according to a judge and jury.
I only bring this up so that if you ever get in a debate or someone says he's not a rapist, they can't falsely dismiss that trumpi is a rapist on a technicality within your statement.
Trump is a rapist.
What the actual fuck
She didn't have her contacts in; it could have been his penis or his pinky finger based on size.
Lock him up! Lock him up! Lock him up! tRump for prison 2023!
Sooo... he's a rapist - as if we needed any confirmation of that.
top 50 comments