Does anyone think that the rape lawsuit against, by Ms. E. Jean Carroll, will succeed?…

…[S]he’s starting a lawsuit against Donald Trump, accusing him of- convincing her to go into a store, a store that just had him in it, and she also accuses him of raping her in that store.

I’m really puzzled as to why this case can go to court since:
1] she seems to be a VERY pro-feminist writer, who has a serious dislike of most men, 2] she doesn’t sound like someone who would be around men she doesn’t know at all, like Trump, because of the violence done to her in the past, and 3] She doesn’t sound like someone who would say to herself: I think it is OK to go into a store or building…,with nobody and no clerks in it…, and go into a dressing room with a man I don’t know…, AND this man is called by many reporters: a rich, powerful, greedy, bullying, white man. Would she really go into a building with someone, or into a room with someone, in these situations? Would she really trust a person + go with him, with all of these red flags on this event?

Do you think that the courts will find him guilty…?

This is only one of many many attempts to destroy Trump through lawfare, and if it fails it will not be the last. Without knowing more details of the case it’s impossible to answer, but even with details it would be impossible to answer. The outcome rests on judge and/or jury (if it’s a jury case), as well as on elements of the law in the state of New York with which I’m almost certainly unfamiliar.

However, I can’t even imagine finding a jury in New York (or perhaps even elsewhere) that is objective.

I have written briefly here about Ms. Carroll’s claims back in June of 2019, around the time they were first aired. The incident is alleged to have occurred in the fall of 1995 or the spring of 1996, so that’s one problem right there: lack of specificity can cast doubt on credibility. Of course, there is also the age of the charges and the fact that they were brought up almost 25 years later, and when the accused was president of the US.

Carroll is a long-time advice columnist for Elle magazine who first made the accusations in a memoir featured in New York magazine. That only solidifies the suspicion that this was done for political reasons and for personal publicity to help sell her book. I don’t know enough about the law in New York to know whether that sort of evidence would be allowed, however. She is also suing Trump for defamation because after the accusations were made public he said she was a liar and also not his type. This type of defamation charge for saying that accusers are liars has become a not-uncommon tactic of women making such accusations against public figures these days.

There are people, and probably even judges, who believe Trump is evil incarnate or at least politically dangerous and who would convict him of raping aliens on the moon if it would serve the cause of stopping him from ever holding a position of power again, and/or of bankrupting him and his family. So even though these charges would probably not even be brought if they weren’t against a public figure like Trump, it is certainly possible he would be found guilty. They are not criminal charges, however – which in a way is an advantage to his accuser because the standard of proof is much lower than in a criminal case.

How is Carroll able to bring charges for such an act that is alleged to have occurred so long ago? Simple. The law in New York was amended recently and she filed as soon as the new law became operative:

The New York Adult Survivors Act gives women a one-year window starting Thursday to file a complaint against an alleged attacker and other responsible parties for incidents of sexual assault perpetrated at any point in their adult lives, starting at 18, within the state of New York.

One notable lawsuit already filed under the new law is against former President Donald Trump.

If you’ve followed my writing on the subject of sexual assault allegations, you’ll see that I believe the standard of proof should be high in order to protect from the very real problem of false allegations. It is just too easy to make them, and in the case of public figures much too rewarding. In the past, some sort of shame might have attached to victims’ coming forward that might have discouraged such false allegations at least somewhat, but that’s long gone. Was this law designed to allow this particular lawsuit against Trump? Let’s just say that Carroll had already made the accusations and had been barred by the statute of limitations from bringing suit prior to the law’s passage, and so it’s certainly possible that getting Trump was one of the goals of the law, although probably unstated.

NOTE: See this. It will give you a glimpse into the mind and motives of Carroll, a rather chilling sight.

The post The attempt to revive a sexual assault case against Trump appeared first on The New Neo.