NEW YORK — In a significant legal ruling on Monday, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed a Manhattan jury’s decision that awarded $5 million in damages to E. Jean Carroll, who accused former President Donald Trump of sexual abuse in a department store dressing room in the mid-1990s. This marks a notable chapter in a series of legal battles involving Trump, who has consistently denied the allegations.
The ruling affirms the jury’s earlier findings in a civil trial where Carroll, a veteran magazine columnist, detailed an incident in 1996 that she claimed escalated from a casual interaction to a violent assault within a dressing room. Despite Trump’s absence from the court proceedings, his contradictory statements were addressed in a subsequent defamation trial that resulted in an additional $83.3 million penalty against him earlier this year.
During the procedures, the appeals court dismissed multiple arguments from Trump’s legal team who sought to invalidate the trial’s outcomes. They contended that the trial judge, Lewis A. Kaplan, allowed prejudicial testimonies and evidence, such as accounts from two other women asserting similar abuses by Trump, and a controversial tape from “Access Hollywood” where Trump made inappropriate remarks about women. The panel of judges, however, found no grounds for a retrial, stating the provided evidence did not infringe upon Trump’s substantial rights.
This legal affirmation comes after both Carroll, 81, and Trump, 78, appeared at the appeals court during the oral arguments in September, showcasing the continuing legal scrutiny surrounding the former president.
In response to the ruling, Trump’s spokesperson, Steven Cheung, criticized the decision, suggesting that it was a continuation of what he described as politically motivated attacks against Trump. Conversely, Carroll’s attorney, Roberta Kaplan (who is not related to the judge), expressed satisfaction with the decision, appreciating the thorough consideration from the Second Circuit.
Interestingly, additional compensation was awarded to Carroll in January when a second jury recognized that Trump’s denigrating remarks made during his presidency were defamatory. The jury was instructed to acknowledge previous findings that confirmed Trump’s abusive actions towards Carroll.
Carroll, who recounted the detrimental impacts of Trump’s public denials on her life and career as an Elle magazine columnist, testified how these statements led to severe personal repercussions including death threats and a fear-induced seclusion in her New York cabin.
During the appeal, Trump’s lawyer, D. John Sauer, argued that the inclusion of testimony from witnesses who recounted Carroll’s immediate disclosures of the assault, as well as the testimonies of two other alleged victims from separate incidents, demonstrated bias against Trump. Nevertheless, the appeals court found that the similarities in Trump’s alleged actions in each case depicted a discernible pattern of behavior, sufficiently corroborated by the infamous “Access Hollywood” tape.
The judicial response to Trump’s appeal illustrates a stringent adherence to precedent and evidential scrutiny, setting a robust example of judicial assessment in high-profile abuse cases.
This article was automatically generated by Open AI. Facts, individuals, and circumstances mentioned may be inaccurate. Any concerns or requests for corrections can be addressed by contacting [email protected].