Jean Carroll lied on the stand.

christiefan915 said:
The only thing fabricated is the above description of what really happened. Fortunately there's a transcript from the trial.

"Ms. Carroll testified that at the time of the incident, Bergdorf’s was relatively empty. She said that there were no attendants in the lingerie section and that the door to the dressing room where she says the rape happened had been left open to allow her and Mr. Trump in. She also testified that no employees attended to her and Mr. Trump while they were in the store. Ms. Carroll called two former Bergdorf employees to the witness stand to bolster her account.

Cheryl Beall, who served as manager of the women’s store in 1996, said that Thursday nights were normally rather quiet. She said the sixth floor, where the lingerie department is, was less busy than other floors. She also said employees would commonly step away from their posts to take a break or help other clients, and that dressing room doors would often be left open despite an unwritten policy of keeping them closed.

When high-profile clients such as Mr. Trump entered, Ms. Beall said, employees were instructed to be “very discreet.”

“It is very much part of the Bergdorf culture to provide privacy and discretion,” Ms. Beall said.

Robert Salerno, who oversaw security at the time, also testified on behalf of Ms. Carroll. Mr. Salerno said that Bergdorf’s had only a few security cameras at the time and that the tapes were not maintained very long. They were often destroyed or taped over, he said."

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/0...id-bergdorf-goodman-could-be-thinly-populated
Click to expand...

What was Trump doing in an empty department store in the lingerie section? Why did she allow Trump in the dressing room with her?

Lots of holes in her "testimony." Like I said, the appeal has already been written, knowing the jury is from NY.
 
RB 60 said:
What was Trump doing in an empty department store in the lingerie section? Why did she allow Trump in the dressing room with her?

Lots of holes in her "testimony." Like I said, the appeal has already been written, knowing the jury is from NY.
Click to expand...
No, there’s just holes in your information. I suggest you read her actual testimony.
 
RB 60 said:
What was Trump doing in an empty department store in the lingerie section? Why did she allow Trump in the dressing room with her?

Lots of holes in her "testimony." Like I said, the appeal has already been written, knowing the jury is from NY.
Click to expand...

You don’t believe Trump grabbed her by the pussy? He was a star back then.
 
Phantasmal said:
No, there’s just holes in your information. I suggest you read her actual testimony.
Click to expand...

When did this happen? What year? Why didn't she report this "incident" when it happened if she was so "traumatized?

The bitch was only after money because her book was a flop, nothing more
 
ExpressLane said:
Carroll said under oath that Trump raped her. The jury said that never happened. So she lied on the stand. Trump told the truth. This is going to get appealed by Trump. How can he defame her by saying he did not rape her. In fact she defamed him by calling him a rapist.
Click to expand...

The whole case was lies. Absurd lies.

The jury and corrupt judge knew full well the entire thing is a farce, but they were there to "Get Trump." not to uphold the law.
 
RB 60 said:
What was Trump doing in an empty department store in the lingerie section? Why did she allow Trump in the dressing room with her?

Lots of holes in her "testimony." Like I said, the appeal has already been written, knowing the jury is from NY.
Click to expand...

The appeal can't argue facts not presented in court. Since Trump didn't testify, he can't argue that he wasn't in the store in an appeal. The appeal would get laughed out of court and his lawyers likely sanctioned for such nonsense.
 
RB 60 said:
When did this happen? What year? Why didn't she report this "incident" when it happened if she was so "traumatized?

The bitch was only after money because her book was a flop, nothing more
Click to expand...
Again, you haven’t read the testimonies in the trial, I suggest you do so, but know you won’t. You will continue this line of dishonesty.
 
RB 60 said:
He said the let him. Why would he go after an ugly woman who wouldn't?

She said nothing for years...until her book flopped.
Click to expand...

He didn’t think she was ugly, he confused a photo of her at the time with his second wife.
 
Phantasmal said:
Again, you haven’t read the testimonies in the trial, I suggest you do so, but know you won’t. You will continue this line of dishonesty.
Click to expand...

Why should I read her lies and innuendo? The "trial" was in NY. Nothing further to read.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top