Why did Trump hand E. Jean Carroll a slam dunk?
Tiana Lowe Doescher
Video Embed
The sexual assault case brought against Donald Trump by E. Jean Carroll was perhaps the only legal proceeding against him with any merit, and luckily for the former president, the ridiculous fracas over the Alvin Bragg indictment and Jack Smith investigation will likely drown out the jury’s verdict that he is indeed liable for sexually abusing and defaming Carroll.
But beyond the moral question of whether Trump deserves a third shot at the presidency is an even more baffling quandary: Why did Trump practically hand Carroll her victory? (Note that Trump was found not responsible on the rape charge and that he denies all the allegations, including ever even meeting Carroll.)
THE FEDERAL DEFICIT ROSE BY 63% IN ONE YEAR
Determining the veracity of sexual misconduct allegations, especially from multiple decades ago, is almost always a matter of “he said, she said.” But in the civil case brought against Trump by Carroll, as the plaintiff’s lawyer remarked, “There wasn’t even a ‘he said’ because Donald Trump never looked you in the eye and denied it.” Although the defendants of criminal trials often decline to testify, Trump not only made the rare and questionable decision not to take the stand in the case against Carroll; he didn’t even show up at court.
Trump’s deposition, which was filmed late last year, provided part of the most obvious defense — mainly that even a moronic rapist would not consider a Bergdorf dressing room a terribly wise scene for a crime — but he also appeared woefully unprepared.
For example, there is exactly one piece of evidence that proves Trump and Carroll had ever even met, a photo of Trump and his first wife Ivana, gaily conversing with Carroll and her then-husband John Johnson. Trump’s team knew that this was the sole piece of evidence undercutting Trump’s claim that he had never met Carroll, and Trump’s team knew that the Republican’s public defense is that he has maintained Carroll is not his “type.” And yet, when presented with the photo, Trump identified Carroll as Marla Maples, his second wife he presumably found so attractive that he divorced his first wife.
Carroll had no forensic evidence, as the one coat she said might have retained his DNA had not been preserved. She had exactly two contemporaneously corroborating witnesses to say she alleged Trump raped her at the time, and she managed to get the judge to permit two other Trump accusers and the Access Hollywood case as evidence.
Carroll’s case wasn’t great, but Trump didn’t even try to combat what evidence she did have. Team Trump will inevitably try to appeal the verdict, and judicial bias could serve as a potent rationale. But if given a second shot, Trump needs to actually show up and fight, lest Carroll prove his misconduct for a second time.