Trump has lost two major cases and Jury findings to E Jean.
He has appealed twice and had 2 standard Second Circuit review the case and failed.
He has then further appealed twice more for an en banc rehearing and after review those failed.
He has applications to the Supreme Court, which almost certainly will also fail, with the SC refusing to hear these cases.
And despite all this process being taken advantage by Trump and at each level appeal the findings of Trump sexually assaulting and defaming E Jean being upheld, his magats will claim Trump did not do it and the courts and Juries were all wrong.
The Carroll case rested on a sequence of legal maneuvers with no precedent in American civil litigation.
Democrat legislators passed a retroactive temporary law eliminating the statute of limitations for decades-old accusations that could not be dated, located, or defended with alibis.
The day the temporary law took effect, Carroll filed her pre-prepared lawsuit, the first in the state to do so.
A Democrat mega-donor secretly funded the plaintiff’s legal costs through a nonprofit. The arrangement stayed hidden until one of Trump’s lawyers discovered it.
A Clinton-appointed judge then sealed all records so the jury never learned the billionaire backer had publicly committed to Trump’s political destruction.
Every participant in the legislative, funding, and judicial steps operated inside the same political network, and each decision produced the same cumulative result.
The jury explicitly checked “no” on the verdict forms' specific rape question.
The judge ruled rape proven anyway, claiming the jury had used a common rather than statutory definition… an impossibility, since their rejection under the common definition precludes rape by any standard.
Trump’s team was barred from arguing innocence before a second jury, which awarded $83.3 million ($65 million punitive) on the rape finding the first jury had rejected.
A defendant was sued for defamation over denying an accusation, prevented from asserting that denial as a defense, tried before a judge who concealed the plaintiff’s political funding, and hit with a nine-figure verdict built on facts the jury itself refused to find.
No comparable sequence exists in recorded U.S. civil litigation history.
apnews.com
