Trump ordered to pay $83.3 million to E Jean Caroll

[Randy Marsh]

Does this affect the presidential race at all?

[Randy Marsh]

IMO, it demonstrates the absurdity of the cases against him and convinces independents that he really is being targeted

[BG-NY]

Who is Jean Carroll?

[GeorgiaModerate]

Who is Jean Carroll?

Google is your friend here. 

[Cyrusman]

How is that possible when her attorneys were seeking 10 million?

[Randy Marsh]

Who is Jean Carroll?

Someone who accused Trump of sexual assault decades ago with no evidence, corroborating witnesses, or even a date that it supposedly happened. Not even the year

How is that possible when her attorneys were seeking 10 million?

Because justice in NY takes a backseat to orange man bad

[Horus]

How is that possible when her attorneys were seeking 10 million?

He was being very flippant about the prior ruling in this case.

[GeorgiaModerate]

How is that possible when her attorneys were seeking 10 million?

65M of the 83M is punitive damages, which jurors can award to any amount they choose (depending on laws in their jurisdiction).

[ProgressiveModerate]

The biggest actual impact is money spent on all his legal problems is less money he (and Rs) will have to actually campaign

[emailking]

Jury awards E. Jean Carroll $83.3 million from Trump for 2019 defamatory statements

Former President Donald Trump should pay $83.3 million to writer E. Jean Carroll for public statements he made in 2019 disparaging Carroll and denying her rape allegations, a Manhattan federal jury determined Friday.

The jury found Trump should pay Carroll compensatory damages of $18.3 million — $11 million to fund a reputational repair campaign and $7.3 million for the emotional harm caused by Trump’s 2019 public statements.

Trump should also pay $65 million in punitive damages for acting maliciously in making the statements about Carroll, the jury found.

The total is more than eight times what Carroll asked for in her initial lawsuit.

Last May, a separate Manhattan federal jury awarded Carroll a total of $5 million in damages — including nearly $3 million for defamation — after they found that Trump sexually abused Carroll and then defamed her in 2022 for public statements he made disparaging her and denying the allegations.

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-trial-e-jean-carroll-01-26-24/index.html

[Cyrusman]

How is that possible when her attorneys were seeking 10 million?

65M of the 83M is punitive damages, which jurors can award to any amount they choose (depending on laws in their jurisdiction).

Whatever someone thinks of Trump that is a ridiculous amount in punitive damages. How do you come to that number and with what calculation?

Can you appeal that?

[emailking]

Apparently he has to pay this, now, as a bond while it is appealed. Because punitive is less than 10 times compensatory it's not likely to be knocked down significantly.

[GeorgiaModerate]

I suspect the higher award in the second trial is because the jury concluded that Trump didn't learn anything from the first one, since he continued to defame her even afterward (which is what the second trial was about).  This cycle could conceivably continue repeating, barring the extremely unlikely event of Trump actually learning to keep his mouth shut.

[emailking]

How is that possible when her attorneys were seeking 10 million?

65M of the 83M is punitive damages, which jurors can award to any amount they choose (depending on laws in their jurisdiction).

Whatever someone thinks of Trump that is a ridiculous amount in punitive damages. How do you come to that number and with what calculation?

Can you appeal that?

The jury is allowed to consider trump's net worth and give an amount in punitive that would meaningfully hurt him and make him stop the defamation. yes it can be appealed but as I just posted, it's not likely to be kocked down much (unless he wins on the question of whether or not he assaulted her).

[Ferguson97]

IMO, it demonstrates the absurdity of the cases against him and convinces independents that he really is being targeted

Why do you view this outcome as a demonstration of absurdity?

[Cyrusman]

How is that possible when her attorneys were seeking 10 million?

65M of the 83M is punitive damages, which jurors can award to any amount they choose (depending on laws in their jurisdiction).

Whatever someone thinks of Trump that is a ridiculous amount in punitive damages. How do you come to that number and with what calculation?

Can you appeal that?

The jury is allowed to consider trump's net worth and give an amount in punitive that would meaningfully hurt him and make him stop the defamation. yes it can be appealed but as I just posted, it's not likely to be kocked down much (unless he wins on the question of whether or not he assaulted her).

What proof did the jury even have that he assaulted her considering it was 27 years ago?

[Progressive Pessimist]

No impact on the race, but it does deprive Trump of some major cash that he would fleece his supporters out if for his campaign otherwise.

[GeorgiaModerate]

How is that possible when her attorneys were seeking 10 million?

65M of the 83M is punitive damages, which jurors can award to any amount they choose (depending on laws in their jurisdiction).

Whatever someone thinks of Trump that is a ridiculous amount in punitive damages. How do you come to that number and with what calculation?

Can you appeal that?

The jury is allowed to consider trump's net worth and give an amount in punitive that would meaningfully hurt him and make him stop the defamation. yes it can be appealed but as I just posted, it's not likely to be kocked down much (unless he wins on the question of whether or not he assaulted her).

What proof did the jury even have that he assaulted her considering it was 27 years ago?

I am sure you can find any number of articles or transcripts of the initial trial in which he was found liable for it.  Note that because this was a civil trial, the standard of proof was "preponderance of evidence" rather than the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard of a criminal trial.

[emailking]

How is that possible when her attorneys were seeking 10 million?

65M of the 83M is punitive damages, which jurors can award to any amount they choose (depending on laws in their jurisdiction).

Whatever someone thinks of Trump that is a ridiculous amount in punitive damages. How do you come to that number and with what calculation?

Can you appeal that?

The jury is allowed to consider trump's net worth and give an amount in punitive that would meaningfully hurt him and make him stop the defamation. yes it can be appealed but as I just posted, it's not likely to be kocked down much (unless he wins on the question of whether or not he assaulted her).

What proof did the jury even have that he assaulted her considering it was 27 years ago?

The judge ruled that the question was already settled from the other trial. So the jury was only determining whether she was owed damages for his statements and how much. They did not hear any evidence that he assaulted her because it was taken as a given for this trial. However if he wins his appeal in the first case where the jury found him liable for sexual assault that could impact this case.

[GeorgiaModerate]

No impact on the race, but it does deprive Trump of some major cash that he would fleece his supporters out if for his campaign otherwise.

https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1751007217262673926

[Podgy the Bear]

Add the $370 million that Letitia James is seeking on the civil fraud case, and we're talking almost half a billion dollars that Trump is going to have to pony up.  And appeals don't really do much--he will have to post bonds if he does appeal.

A Trump supporter would have to be an absolute moron to contribute to his campaign in this case--because it's not going to go to election matters.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

That's why he is gonna loose

[Randy Marsh]

The biggest actual impact is money spent on all his legal problems is less money he (and Rs) will have to actually campaign

Blatant election interference

[ProgressiveModerate]

The biggest actual impact is money spent on all his legal problems is less money he (and Rs) will have to actually campaign

Blatant election interference

It's not, but either way Republican primary voters have a choice to not choose the guy with mounting legal problems and debt.

[SnowLabrador]

It does not matter much, if anything it helps Trump.