In a New York courtroom, E. Jean Carroll, an 80-year-old writer and former columnist, encountered a barrage of inquiries from Donald Trump’s lawyer as she pursues a defamation lawsuit against the former President. Carroll alleges that Trump raped her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in 1996, a claim Trump vehemently denies. Seeking over $10 million in damages, Carroll’s case centers on Trump’s public denial and characterization of her as a liar.
Despite Trump’s absence from the court due to attending his mother-in-law’s funeral, his lawyer, Alina Habba, attempted to challenge Carroll’s credibility. Habba insinuated that Carroll benefited from the publicity surrounding her accusation, questioning whether she enjoyed the attention and praise from celebrities like Bette Midler.
Carroll conceded that she appreciated the compliments but refuted any improvement in her social “status.” She revealed receiving numerous hateful messages and threats from Trump’s supporters online. While acknowledging invitations to parties hosted by Vanity Fair writer Molly Jong-Fast, where she mingled with celebrities, Carroll emphasized that her primary motive for suing Trump was to restore her reputation tarnished by his false denial.
During the trial overseen by US District Judge Lewis Kaplan, it was established that Trump acted with “malice” when defaming Carroll. Kaplan ruled that Trump’s assertion that Carroll accused him of rape for “publicity” was false. Carroll, dressed in a white blazer and brown turtleneck, affirmed that her participation in the trial aimed to reclaim her old reputation and status.
The trial, expected to last a week, involves a jury of nine New Yorkers who will determine the amount Trump must pay Carroll. In addition to seeking compensatory damages, Carroll is also pursuing punitive damages to deter Trump from continuing to defame her. The proceedings will resume on Monday following a break on Friday. Judge Kaplan affirmed that Carroll’s claim of Trump “raping” her remains “substantially true” in the contemporary sense, even if the previous jury did not confirm the specific nature of the alleged assault.
The outcome of this trial will have significant implications for the ongoing legal battles surrounding accusations against Donald Trump and the broader conversation on defamation and accountability.
Comments