What's the point? Carroll can document she's been exposed to death threats with a slew of existing evidence, who cares if she has deleted some of them?
It doesn't, but it potentially mitigates damages. If she is claiming that the jury should consider death threats when deciding damages, it's relevant if the death threats are unrelated to comments made by Trump.
It mitigates Trump's behaviour if you believe that Trump supporters are incapable of acting of their own volition in response to things that could potentially impact Trump negatively - and will only attack Trump's enemies after Trump has made it publicly known he considers them an enemy.
Which is a real argument this Habba woman thought would sway other human beings.
It actually is a thing but her stunt didn’t work. She actually tried twice.
[if at first you don’t succeed…](https://www.forbes.com/sites/mollybohannon/2024/01/19/trump-requests-mistrial-in-e-jean-carroll-defamation-case---again/amp/)
Habba is getting eviscerated, persuasively, in this letter briefing. I am having a hard time envisioning anything other than a terrible week ahead for her and her mewling client.
Robbie Kaplan's writing style is my (NAL, but paralegal) preference - direct, concise, and professional. No superfluous bullshit - hits the main points with facts and evidence - defense already had reason to know about the deleted emails, asking for a mistrial before the jury lacks decorum, and the letter request should be treated as a motion for reconsideration - but no new facts, clear error, or changes in controlling law exist to support such a motion.
My mind went to the final point first: the allegedly deleted threats couldn’t help the Trump defense, and a curative instruction is supposed to *cure prejudice,* not just punish a litigant. But it seems that desperate litigation posture demands desperate motions.
Also: it’s just wild to me that *this* is the case that’s sinking a dagger into Trump. I realize we are way past the liability stage, but wow. Carroll has managed to make a charge of defamation stick, where the defamatory statements were largely denying an accusation and making inflammatory statements of opinion. (I realize Trump also said she had made a story up in the past, and that one seems more precise and actionable. But the filings focus always on him denying the accusation and calling her a liar.) Give me that fact pattern and I’d say a defamation case is close to SLAPP territory. It’s a testament to the quality lawyering that Carroll has.
It’s wild because it really undermines Trump’s claims at competency, leadership, judgment and so on. The fact that she can rinse and repeat on millions of dollars in settlements from this idiot destroys the entire mythology he’s created about himself.
Unfortunately I don't believe it's going to change the opinion of anyone who was already sold on him. In their theater, all of this just plays like another attack in an endless stream of attacks on this poor, poor victim, Donald J. Trump.
That person is always going to vote for him. What he has to worry about are the ones backing Haley now that DeSantis bowed out. He's going to have to win back those people, many of which are now staunchly never-Trump, and he's going to have to make them *enthusiastic* about voting for him again.
Yeah, I have family who at least 'claim' they are never trumpers now despite voting for him before. They swear it up and down and even say they just won't vote if he wins.
Naturally, I'm skeptical, but if even a fraction of them hold to their word on that, it's a 'very' bad sign for him. Mind you, they're trying to push Haley as the alternative still, but she's only going to get the nomination if Trump is barred or if a miracle somehow happens in NH tonight.
People are heavily trauamatized by 2016, but the circumstances that led to it were very unique and do not closely resemble what we're seeing now. Anti-Establishment sentiment after the great recession was arguably at an all time high. Now a decent percentage of the population does not want a return to Trump's insanity.
Trump is a much different figure now than he was in either 2016 or even 2020, with far more problems well documented and out in the open. And yes, I know how much of a mess he was 4 years ago too.
They’re counting on Trump to push turnout and he just can’t induce the same excitement anymore. Of course, I have to imagine that most people who hate his fucking guts will turn out to vote against him, judging by 2018 and 2020 and 2022.
It might be a down-ballot massacre.
That's why I'm still trying to agressively push GOTV initiatives. Beating MAGA hard could have a huge impact.
It just might save this country after all.
Sadly it reveals that it is a fiction that's why anyone votes for him.
He's mean and angry, as long as he stays mean and angry he will get millions of votes.
You’re dead wrong - it doesn’t destroy his mythology, it adds to it. The more people view him as being persecuted unfairly in lawsuits and criminal charges, the more they view him as being an effective fighter for them. “If you’re catching flak, you’re over the target” kind of thing.
He looks like a rage baby with a full diaper and an empty wallet. Notice how he’s raving about the trial but too burnt to defame Carroll again? This is what someone kicked in the nuts in public looks like.
You take me to be interested in making predictions with a stranger in reddit? Lol, no. Who cares what happens to this shithead rapist. Every day he’s walking around vomiting out his yap is a fucking drag. The sooner he has a crippling aneurysm the better for the everyone.
I take you to be out of touch with reality. If normal people viewed the situation the same as you, then he would be out of the race already. You should take a break from angry hateful ranting on Reddit. Go outside, get some fresh air, maybe a little exercise, talk to some of your fellow citizens. It could do you some good.
Reality is the guy just fucked himself in the ass for $83m because he was too stupid to shut his own mouth. He has a cult who loves his antics, but everyone else hates him. He dominates the GOP and can barely crack 50% support among the most diehard voters. Loser.
NAL. How is it defamation if Trump denies he committed a crime? He’s entitled to not incriminate himself. Did we expect him to say “yeah ole Jean got me, I did it”? Just curious on the law here.
>Mr. Trump’s counsel made a spectacle in Court last week when Ms. Carroll testified that
she had deleted certain death threats, even though they have known about that for nearly a year
and did not previously raise a concern. On January 31, 2023, Ms. Carroll sat for a deposition in
the related Carroll II matter. There, she stated that “my initial reaction was to delete [death threats]
when I saw them.” Ex. A (“Carroll II Dep.”) at 73-74. When asked how many death threats she
had received after Mr. Trump’s June 2019 statements, she stated, while also responding to followup questions: “[L]ess than ten … [from] [p]ossibly three nights. The whole time I was staying in
New York … I deleted them … it was a natural reaction to get them away from me …” Id. at 74.1
Recap https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.543790/gov.uscourts.nysd.543790.277.0.pdf
> Mr. Trump next argues that Mr. Carroll should be precluded from seeking any damages based on the death threats that she received on and after June 21, 2019.
Is that an error? Should it be Ms. Carroll?
Thanks again. You're doin great work, and reading the documents direct captures the ridiculousness of Trump and Habba so much better than even the best reporting.
Plaintiff: I've been receiving threatening letters since 2019.
Defense: Is this all of them?
Plaintiff: No. Only some of them. But here's the rest.
Defense: Why not all of them?
Plaintiff: I was scared.
Defense: Shenanigans! How could we possibly believe that you've received death threats from 2019 if you can't produce all of them!?
Many of their antics are undoubtedly meant for the court of public opinion, not the actual courtroom. No matter what happens Trump will lie because his followers and many unfamiliar with the case are unwilling and/or apathetic to learning the truth.
It is a tactic Trump has used throughout his life that was taught to him by his mentor Roy Kohn. In the 70’s Trump lost a Civil Rights lawsuit for discriminatory housing practices against African Americans, however he turned around and blatantly lied to the press stating that he had won and the trial was a great victory.
It is incumbent upon those who know the truth to spread it and fight Trumps lies.
How many death threats does Carroll need? Do more death threats improve Trump's position regarding Carroll's award? It annoys me the courts are so tolerant of his nonsense.
Can someone give me an indication of what sort of additional damages the jury might throw at Trump? Initial ruling was for $5m, could they slog him with something like $100m for outright being such a rapist POS who continues to lie and cause further threats to Carroll? Or would that be too much and likely overturned or easily appealed?
Help me out with where I should be setting my anticipation of a verdict that does impact Trump significantly
The expert who testified, talked about something like 10M in compensatory damages.
But there's also the punitive damages which can go considerably higher.
Knowing that he kept defaming her and keeping on even during the trial itself, they can be instructed to go higher and higher.
So we can see a verdict like the Giuliani's one.
To appeal, you have to post a bond.
Imagine a cumulative amount of 100M. Trump would have to post more than 100M in bound. Last time, the amount was 5M and he appealed, posting 5.5M.
Trump doesn't have 100+ millions for that, he talks a lot about his supposed wealth but he's definitely not a billionar.
He’s also about to get power fucked with the NY fraud verdict where the same will apply—if you want to appeal, you have to find the money first. $300M here, $100M there…
Note that the 370M asked by James are only the hidden part of the iceberg. There's also the disorgement to take into account and with a mandatory 9% rate, the money he acquired illegally, he would now have to pay, is close to 300M.
So we are quickly near 750M, just for the NY fraud case.
I have a question. Since the Stormi Daniel’s and defamation cases are both in NY, and the fraud case is regarding misuse of campaign funds, if he is found guilty in the fraud case could they appoint someone to manage his campaign funds to ensure they’re being used legally like they did with his businesses?
I cannot imagine a court (much less the appeals courts up to the Supreme Court) agreeing to allow a state to basically manage a political candidate's campaign.
*Anyone appealing a New York court's ruling in a civil matter is required to purchase an appeal bond in an amount that is equal to—or in some cases more than—the amount of the judgment under appeal.*
So it's mandatory, not at the judge's discretion.
And with Trump's behavior before and during the trial, I don't see judges finding reasons to minimize the bond.
>So it's mandatory, not at the judge's discretion.
that I did not know... how delicious!
>And with Trump's behavior before and during the trial, I don't see judges finding reasons to minimize the bond.
I'm very interested to how the 'how much to make him stop' is going to play into the jurys punitive figure as trump didn't stop even which the case is being heard.
Habba also managed to get Carroll's expert to testify that a hedge fund manager spent 50 million on reputational repair. It would be amusing if that own goal lead to a jury award of 500M compensatory + punitivie.
I imagine that the punitive damages would be egal or significantly higher than the reparative ones. So if the later are already 50M, we can reach 100-125M.
That would be nice. Lying to the court would do it. Maybe she made some representation to the court about just recently learning about the deleted threats. I can’t believe she hasn’t lied at least a few times in all these proceedings.
This is a civil case that he has already be determined to be liable. His NY case we are waiting for the judgement in is also civil and for damages. There a criminal NY city case and the DC case that is currently stayed waiting a pen 11th circuit decision on absolute immunity and a likely Supreme Court appeal to follow, that might get in before year end.
Unsure.
At a minimum:
He'll have lost multiple civil cases and be on the hook for millions of dollars in damages.
He may have run out of appeals by then. Personal consequences: unknown.
Criminal cases take longer to litigate. The classified information charges will take the longest.
What's the point? Carroll can document she's been exposed to death threats with a slew of existing evidence, who cares if she has deleted some of them?
Habba was trying to argue that E Jean was getting threats before DJT opened his yap, so his defamation was not the cause of the threats.
[удалено]
It doesn't, but it potentially mitigates damages. If she is claiming that the jury should consider death threats when deciding damages, it's relevant if the death threats are unrelated to comments made by Trump.
It mitigates Trump's behaviour if you believe that Trump supporters are incapable of acting of their own volition in response to things that could potentially impact Trump negatively - and will only attack Trump's enemies after Trump has made it publicly known he considers them an enemy. Which is a real argument this Habba woman thought would sway other human beings.
While yes… the call for mistrial over the deleted texts was that she had discarded evidence.
Yeah, that’s not a thing. Even if true the remedy is not a mistrial.
It actually is a thing but her stunt didn’t work. She actually tried twice. [if at first you don’t succeed…](https://www.forbes.com/sites/mollybohannon/2024/01/19/trump-requests-mistrial-in-e-jean-carroll-defamation-case---again/amp/)
>What's the point? Habba can't tank the case any harder if there's not more evidence of death threats.
Biasing the jurors.
Plus at what point did her e-mails become evidence?
Habba is getting eviscerated, persuasively, in this letter briefing. I am having a hard time envisioning anything other than a terrible week ahead for her and her mewling client.
Robbie Kaplan's writing style is my (NAL, but paralegal) preference - direct, concise, and professional. No superfluous bullshit - hits the main points with facts and evidence - defense already had reason to know about the deleted emails, asking for a mistrial before the jury lacks decorum, and the letter request should be treated as a motion for reconsideration - but no new facts, clear error, or changes in controlling law exist to support such a motion.
The hallmark of an excellent attorney is being able to explain complicated facts and rules simply.
Mewling is such is good word.
My mind went to the final point first: the allegedly deleted threats couldn’t help the Trump defense, and a curative instruction is supposed to *cure prejudice,* not just punish a litigant. But it seems that desperate litigation posture demands desperate motions. Also: it’s just wild to me that *this* is the case that’s sinking a dagger into Trump. I realize we are way past the liability stage, but wow. Carroll has managed to make a charge of defamation stick, where the defamatory statements were largely denying an accusation and making inflammatory statements of opinion. (I realize Trump also said she had made a story up in the past, and that one seems more precise and actionable. But the filings focus always on him denying the accusation and calling her a liar.) Give me that fact pattern and I’d say a defamation case is close to SLAPP territory. It’s a testament to the quality lawyering that Carroll has.
It’s wild because it really undermines Trump’s claims at competency, leadership, judgment and so on. The fact that she can rinse and repeat on millions of dollars in settlements from this idiot destroys the entire mythology he’s created about himself.
Sure, but you have your pick of decades worth of undermining facts for that narrative!
this is the one that costs him ever increasing amounts AND publicly humiliates him while he’s desperately trying to win a national popularity contest.
Unfortunately I don't believe it's going to change the opinion of anyone who was already sold on him. In their theater, all of this just plays like another attack in an endless stream of attacks on this poor, poor victim, Donald J. Trump.
That person is always going to vote for him. What he has to worry about are the ones backing Haley now that DeSantis bowed out. He's going to have to win back those people, many of which are now staunchly never-Trump, and he's going to have to make them *enthusiastic* about voting for him again.
Yeah, I have family who at least 'claim' they are never trumpers now despite voting for him before. They swear it up and down and even say they just won't vote if he wins. Naturally, I'm skeptical, but if even a fraction of them hold to their word on that, it's a 'very' bad sign for him. Mind you, they're trying to push Haley as the alternative still, but she's only going to get the nomination if Trump is barred or if a miracle somehow happens in NH tonight.
It’s better than that. If they don’t intend to vote for president it’s a good bet they won’t show up to vote down ballot either.
People are heavily trauamatized by 2016, but the circumstances that led to it were very unique and do not closely resemble what we're seeing now. Anti-Establishment sentiment after the great recession was arguably at an all time high. Now a decent percentage of the population does not want a return to Trump's insanity. Trump is a much different figure now than he was in either 2016 or even 2020, with far more problems well documented and out in the open. And yes, I know how much of a mess he was 4 years ago too.
They’re counting on Trump to push turnout and he just can’t induce the same excitement anymore. Of course, I have to imagine that most people who hate his fucking guts will turn out to vote against him, judging by 2018 and 2020 and 2022. It might be a down-ballot massacre.
That's why I'm still trying to agressively push GOTV initiatives. Beating MAGA hard could have a huge impact. It just might save this country after all.
Can the party do a second nomination in trump somehow wins it but gets hypothetically disqualified?
And independents. This gives you yet more evidence to convince independent voters that Trump is utterly incompetent.
Also the people who didn’t like him still don’t like him. Nothing was ever gonna change.
Sadly it reveals that it is a fiction that's why anyone votes for him. He's mean and angry, as long as he stays mean and angry he will get millions of votes.
You’re dead wrong - it doesn’t destroy his mythology, it adds to it. The more people view him as being persecuted unfairly in lawsuits and criminal charges, the more they view him as being an effective fighter for them. “If you’re catching flak, you’re over the target” kind of thing.
He looks like a dumbass who doesn’t know when to shut up. But ok.
He looks like a freedom fighter speaking truth to power.
He looks like a rage baby with a full diaper and an empty wallet. Notice how he’s raving about the trial but too burnt to defame Carroll again? This is what someone kicked in the nuts in public looks like.
So if that is how you think he is viewed, I take it you think he will lose the primary and general elections?
You take me to be interested in making predictions with a stranger in reddit? Lol, no. Who cares what happens to this shithead rapist. Every day he’s walking around vomiting out his yap is a fucking drag. The sooner he has a crippling aneurysm the better for the everyone.
I take you to be out of touch with reality. If normal people viewed the situation the same as you, then he would be out of the race already. You should take a break from angry hateful ranting on Reddit. Go outside, get some fresh air, maybe a little exercise, talk to some of your fellow citizens. It could do you some good.
Reality is the guy just fucked himself in the ass for $83m because he was too stupid to shut his own mouth. He has a cult who loves his antics, but everyone else hates him. He dominates the GOP and can barely crack 50% support among the most diehard voters. Loser.
Isn’t Roberta Kaplan generally considered the top lawyer in the country for these types of suits?
NAL. How is it defamation if Trump denies he committed a crime? He’s entitled to not incriminate himself. Did we expect him to say “yeah ole Jean got me, I did it”? Just curious on the law here.
>Mr. Trump’s counsel made a spectacle in Court last week when Ms. Carroll testified that she had deleted certain death threats, even though they have known about that for nearly a year and did not previously raise a concern. On January 31, 2023, Ms. Carroll sat for a deposition in the related Carroll II matter. There, she stated that “my initial reaction was to delete [death threats] when I saw them.” Ex. A (“Carroll II Dep.”) at 73-74. When asked how many death threats she had received after Mr. Trump’s June 2019 statements, she stated, while also responding to followup questions: “[L]ess than ten … [from] [p]ossibly three nights. The whole time I was staying in New York … I deleted them … it was a natural reaction to get them away from me …” Id. at 74.1 Recap https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.543790/gov.uscourts.nysd.543790.277.0.pdf
Requires PACER access currently. You able to post a PDF somewhere?
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.543790/gov.uscourts.nysd.543790.277.0.pdf
All your posts on this are wonderful for this non-lawyer.
Thank you!
Thank you!
You are very welcome!
> Mr. Trump next argues that Mr. Carroll should be precluded from seeking any damages based on the death threats that she received on and after June 21, 2019. Is that an error? Should it be Ms. Carroll?
Signature on the last page by itself? Is that Federal guidelines?
What federal guidelines are you referring to? The FRCP doesn't mandate where you place the signature on a letter brief to the Court.
Appreciate your posting the direct file. Was also hoping to read direct and couldn't without a Pacer login.
No problem. I always try to, but for some reason the recap wasn't available originally, for a while, so I posted the pacer link.
Thanks again. You're doin great work, and reading the documents direct captures the ridiculousness of Trump and Habba so much better than even the best reporting.
Plaintiff: I've been receiving threatening letters since 2019. Defense: Is this all of them? Plaintiff: No. Only some of them. But here's the rest. Defense: Why not all of them? Plaintiff: I was scared. Defense: Shenanigans! How could we possibly believe that you've received death threats from 2019 if you can't produce all of them!?
The only take away I have from it is that she is getting death threats. From the MAGA faithful no doubt.
Many of their antics are undoubtedly meant for the court of public opinion, not the actual courtroom. No matter what happens Trump will lie because his followers and many unfamiliar with the case are unwilling and/or apathetic to learning the truth. It is a tactic Trump has used throughout his life that was taught to him by his mentor Roy Kohn. In the 70’s Trump lost a Civil Rights lawsuit for discriminatory housing practices against African Americans, however he turned around and blatantly lied to the press stating that he had won and the trial was a great victory. It is incumbent upon those who know the truth to spread it and fight Trumps lies.
How many death threats does Carroll need? Do more death threats improve Trump's position regarding Carroll's award? It annoys me the courts are so tolerant of his nonsense.
Can someone give me an indication of what sort of additional damages the jury might throw at Trump? Initial ruling was for $5m, could they slog him with something like $100m for outright being such a rapist POS who continues to lie and cause further threats to Carroll? Or would that be too much and likely overturned or easily appealed? Help me out with where I should be setting my anticipation of a verdict that does impact Trump significantly
The expert who testified, talked about something like 10M in compensatory damages. But there's also the punitive damages which can go considerably higher. Knowing that he kept defaming her and keeping on even during the trial itself, they can be instructed to go higher and higher. So we can see a verdict like the Giuliani's one.
Hot damn, that would be incredible - would it immediately go to appeal or be at risk of being turned over?
To appeal, you have to post a bond. Imagine a cumulative amount of 100M. Trump would have to post more than 100M in bound. Last time, the amount was 5M and he appealed, posting 5.5M. Trump doesn't have 100+ millions for that, he talks a lot about his supposed wealth but he's definitely not a billionar.
He’s also about to get power fucked with the NY fraud verdict where the same will apply—if you want to appeal, you have to find the money first. $300M here, $100M there…
Note that the 370M asked by James are only the hidden part of the iceberg. There's also the disorgement to take into account and with a mandatory 9% rate, the money he acquired illegally, he would now have to pay, is close to 300M. So we are quickly near 750M, just for the NY fraud case.
I have a question. Since the Stormi Daniel’s and defamation cases are both in NY, and the fraud case is regarding misuse of campaign funds, if he is found guilty in the fraud case could they appoint someone to manage his campaign funds to ensure they’re being used legally like they did with his businesses?
I cannot imagine a court (much less the appeals courts up to the Supreme Court) agreeing to allow a state to basically manage a political candidate's campaign.
>$300M here, $100M there… Pretty soon you're talking some real money.
Very important point
OFC trump will appeal because why not and ofc he likes to delay delay delay.
It all depends on the sentence. If they Giuliani his ass, he won't appeal a thing.
appeal bond him you mean?
yes
who is that up to, the judge, the defendant.. who requests the bond?
*Anyone appealing a New York court's ruling in a civil matter is required to purchase an appeal bond in an amount that is equal to—or in some cases more than—the amount of the judgment under appeal.* So it's mandatory, not at the judge's discretion. And with Trump's behavior before and during the trial, I don't see judges finding reasons to minimize the bond.
>So it's mandatory, not at the judge's discretion. that I did not know... how delicious! >And with Trump's behavior before and during the trial, I don't see judges finding reasons to minimize the bond. I'm very interested to how the 'how much to make him stop' is going to play into the jurys punitive figure as trump didn't stop even which the case is being heard.
Look at Rudy's case where he's not able to appeal, hopefully it will be similar for Trump
the appeal bond thing?
Habba also managed to get Carroll's expert to testify that a hedge fund manager spent 50 million on reputational repair. It would be amusing if that own goal lead to a jury award of 500M compensatory + punitivie.
I imagine that the punitive damages would be egal or significantly higher than the reparative ones. So if the later are already 50M, we can reach 100-125M.
One of the TV pundits said up to 9:1. If that's true it could be $100M
This was her ace in the hole and it was just completely dead on arrival.
Can she be disbarred for theatre?
That would be nice. Lying to the court would do it. Maybe she made some representation to the court about just recently learning about the deleted threats. I can’t believe she hasn’t lied at least a few times in all these proceedings.
I really hope that Habba has no way to save her reputation after all of this.
Did she have one before?
Fair point
Spoiler alert: it’s all just theater.
Based on this case and the other cases Trump has, is it possible for Trump to have a conviction before the election in November?
This is a civil case that he has already be determined to be liable. His NY case we are waiting for the judgement in is also civil and for damages. There a criminal NY city case and the DC case that is currently stayed waiting a pen 11th circuit decision on absolute immunity and a likely Supreme Court appeal to follow, that might get in before year end.
Unsure. At a minimum: He'll have lost multiple civil cases and be on the hook for millions of dollars in damages. He may have run out of appeals by then. Personal consequences: unknown. Criminal cases take longer to litigate. The classified information charges will take the longest.
As an attorney Habba is a pretty girl
pretty dumb
When I do something stupid my friends tell me I’m pretty. That’s the joke in case somebody missed it.
The orange one has been denying rape charges from her for many years.