SadKangaroo wrote on Dec 20
th, 2024 at 2:38pm:
The truth is important so I'm glad the record was cleared.
You wouldn't want people to think that Trump has been found liable for rape by a jury, when it was only sexual battery and defamation of E. Jean Carroll he was found liable for.
It's an important distinction, one requires forced penetration and the other doesn't.
It's a good thing Trump didn't have his little blue pills that day...
Actually, the jury found that Trump violently penetrated her with his finger, and not his penis.
If it had been his penis, the would have found him liable for rape.
The problem is that Trump's tiny hands have tiny fingers and thus the jury couldn't be certain if it was his penis he violently penetrated her with or his finger. Both are the same size.
Either way, he
was found liable for violently penetrating a woman against her will.
Quote:She described him curving his finger inside her, saying it was "extremely painful" and "a horrible feeling."
Under New York criminal law, an assault constitutes "rape" only if it involves vaginal penetration by a penis. That was the definition the jury was instructed to use in the civil case.
By responding "no" to the question of whether Carroll proved Trump raped her, the jurors indicated they weren't convinced Trump penetrated Carroll with his penis, according to Kaplan, who first wrote about the issue in July when he denied Trump a new trial in the sexual abuse case.
But the jurors' conclusion that Trump sexually abused Carroll "necessarily implies" that they did, in fact, believe he penetrated her with his fingers, Kaplan said.
The people defending him are defending a violent rapist and using semantics as their excuse.
The question has to be asked: what sort of person continually defends an adjudicated rapist - another rapist, perhaps?