Citation to them changing it just for her?
Statutes of Limitation can be changed and they can be changed for a limited time. Why not?
E Jean Carrol case stands! Appeal denied.
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
Statutes of Limitation can be changed and they can be changed for a limited time. Why not?
Yakuda
Verified User
Don't be a pussy. I conceded that I can't show it was for her so tell me what the probability his that the was strictly random. I know you will be a little bitch but I'll let you prove me right.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Last edited:
If you look at the record for why they changed the law you will see that it was done for an entire host of sexual assault victims who were unjustly closed out for such claims.
So you lied when you claimed it was done just for her.
Yakuda
Verified User
Oh you mean like that gold digging whore Carroll? So you're saying the NY state legislature no longer gives a fucking shit about "...an entire host of sexual assault victims who were unjustly closed out for such claims."? That sounds about right for you dick wads.
Hyperbole. Don't like it? I don't give a shit. Now tell me the probability it was purely random. And why was it temporary. Oh that's right you pieces of shit don't actually care about anything you claim to care about all.thst matters is "get trump".
We know you people would kill your own grandmother if you thought it would help "get trump" admit it! C'mon man!
You are so triggered, sorry you are having a hard time.
It appears we have seen.
A three judge panel rejected Trump's arguments last August and upheld the $5 million verdict.
This last week the full court refused to hear the case en banc by a vote of 8-2. That shows there isn't much there for hearing the case.
Trump's only next step after this is to go the USSC. The likelihood of them accepting this case is pretty low.
Here is the appeals court ruling upholding the jury verdict
2 notable things about the ruling - It cites rules 413, 414 and 415 as allowing the testimony of the other women. It then says under the standards of judicial review they can only overturn if the lower court was arbitrary or irrational in it's actions.
Finally it ends with this -
As we have discussed, the district court did not abuse its discretion
in making any of the challenged evidentiary rulings. The jury made its
assessment of the facts and claims on a properly developed record. Even
assuming arguendo that the district court erred in some of these evidentiary
rulings -- a proposition that we have rejected -- taking the record as a whole and
considering the strength of Ms. Carroll's case, we are not persuaded that any
claimed error or combination of errors in the district court's evidentiary rulings
affected Mr. Trump's substantial rights. Lore, 670 F.3d at 155.
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
Separate case that likely will be wholly tossed out in the appellate process.
Yakuda
Verified User
So you admit it wasn't because they actually gave a shit about "...an entire host of sexual assault victims who were unjustly closed out for such claims." but it helped the gold digging whore file the claim.
Everytime you step.on your dick you claim I'm "triggered". Hilarious
No, what do you base that lie on?
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Time will tell. Unlike you, I'm not even a Sea Lawyer nor pretend to be one.
Yakuda
Verified User
So you admit demholes don't give a shit about "...an entire host of sexual assault victims who were unjustly closed out for such claims." That they just gave the gold.digging whore the time to file a claim. There are no more sexual assault victims in NY who missed a chance to file.right?
No, why do you need to make stuff up to support your position?
Yakuda
Verified User
It's like you being a lawyer...imaginary
IBDaMann
Well-known member
Exactly. There's no king to protect.
It appears the only way to stall is appeal to the USSC which would require that they accept it. If they don't accept it, then there is no more stalling since all appeals will have been exhausted.
Yakuda
Verified User
Those are your words. If that was the reason they might have changed it why was it only temporary? Sexual assault victims in NY are no longer entitled to justice?
No, not my words, yours. THat is what you say, not me.