Thanks, I can easily see a number of people that had only been willing to issue a press release before and are now thinking maybe I am willing to put myself through trial.
May this only be the beginning.
ISWYDT.
More to come in the coming months, I gather.
So, one thing I don’t get: Why did the lawyers ask Trump to identify the picture of Carroll? I mean, clearly, Trump’s actual answer (misidentifying her as Maples) was devastating to his case, but they can’t possibly have expected him to be that idiotic, could they? What lesser-stupid thing were they expecting him to say?
That he and Carrol were the people in the photograph. Simple as that.
Edit: So why do the above? so there is some tangible proof that Trump and Carrol were together in that time period and on some level knew of each other. Same orbit. etc etc.
IANAL, but my understanding is that permission to appeal is required, which is sought by filing a motion for permission to appeal in a civil case. Which seems to me to imply that such permission may not be granted if they don’t have good reasons for it. They may not necessarily have them just because Tapioca Man says they do. Trump’s habit of abusing the legal system by dragging things out as long as possible is not likely endearing him to many judges.
Because Trump claimed he didn’t know her and never met her. The photo is direct evidence that this was a lie. The spontaneous statement by Trump that it was his wife, Marla Maples, was just icing on the cake.
It also punctures his “she’s not my type“ defense, which was not much of a defense to begin with. Unless he saying that Marla is not his type either.
Maybe he’s on contingency, so he gets 30% of minus $5 million?
You’ve stumbled onto the confusing world of NY Courts. It always confuses me - I’ve answered this question before and I have no confidence I’m going to answer it right here.
Unless I’m missing what you’re asking entirely, a person can always appeal their trial court verdict to the next appellate level court - I think that’s what you’re asking. If so, and if they lose at the appellate level, they can ask permission to appeal that appellate level ruling to the highest court in NY (which is what you linked).
I have to use vague descriptive words because the highest court in NY is called the “Court of Appeals” and the trial Court level where this case took place is called the “Supreme Court” - confusing. The link to your website takes you to the highest level - Court of Appeals, and that’s where you need to file a motion for permission to appeal to them from an appellate decision since the highest court (Court of Appeals) are not required to hear every case (I don’t think; just like the US Supreme Court is not required to hear every case submitted to them).
I don’t think you need “permission” to appeal a trial court verdict to the next level. There’s hurdles, but it’s just procedural and timing things.
Here’s a link to NY State Court Structure. It confuses me every time.
We have a similar structure in some provinces, where the provincial Supreme Court is the trial court, and the Court of Appeal is the highest court. Nomclature that dates back to English court structure.
We don’t have an intermediate court of appeals as most states do; not enough litigation to warrant it.
Ah, OK, I hadn’t realized that Trump was in the same photograph. That makes sense, then.
Right, it fortuitously had that effect, since Trump was even more monumentally stupid than anyone could have expected, but that can’t have been the plaintiff’s motive.
I saw an article (don’t remember if it’s been linked in this thread) that said that Trump may have been undone by his own vanity. He needs reading glasses, but never wears them in public because , you know, alpha male.
So the pix were blurry to him, as he said in the videoed deposition.
$5 million for vanity. Steep price.
Drug store readers? About five bucks.
Also, The Photograph shows E. Jean Carroll was a stunningly beautiful woman, so – even setting aside TFG mistaking her for Marla Maples – it further bespeaks the profound moral bankruptcy of the TFG supporters who are incessantly disparaging Ms. Carroll’s appearance.
We will never see Trump testify on a witness stand, ever. Any lawyer who allows him to would be an idiot. No way can Trump have the discipline to not perjure himself constantly. If he testified in this case, he probably would have committed more acts of defamation right from the stand.
How many outright lies did he make in the deposition? Any of them rise to the level of prosecutable perjury?
Thanks for the explanation. I guess what I was asking is whether Trump had an unconditional right to appeal, and the answer appears to be “yes”, but permission is required to appeal again to the highest court in the state. Though it makes me wonder why Tapioca Man made a big deal of the fact that they had “filed motions” which gave them “many issues” for an appeal (I think Tapioca Man meant to say “many grounds” for an appeal, but he doesn’t appear to be too bright – something he has in common with most other Trump lawyers).
Those are the only kind he hires, probably because they’re the only kind willing to work for him.
Thread title updated to reflect current events.
RickJay
Moderator
I think that’s correct.
I’m glad to be corrected here, but I don’t see a difference between using “issues” or “grounds” for an appeal - definitely not when speaking to the public in layman terms. His reference to filing motions is likely motions filed in the trial court, which were denied, that he will now appeal. But honestly, I don’t really know with that guy - he’s a nut.
There’s nothing jumping out at me regarding the facts or law being appealable. Carrol provided evidence of sexual abuse (her testimony) and the jury believed her over Trump’s “denial”. It’s simple as that. (I know there was more evidence to corroborate, but that alone is enough).
Trump team’s best bet is to go after the Judge’s various pre-trial and trial rulings (and behavior) - keeping evidence in or out, various objections, etc. and hope something technical lands. It’s a longshot.
I really hope they showed the “Person, woman, man, camera, TV” thing to emphasize his remarkable memory.