Testimony in Trump rape accuser’s trial gets underway

E. Jean Carroll, Former U.S. President Donald Trump rape accuser, departs following the start of a civil case at Manhattan federal court in New York City, U.S., April 25, 2023. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid

NEW YORK (Reuters) – The civil trial of a nearly 30-year-old rape claim against Donald Trump is expected to resume on Wednesday, including the start of testimony expected to feature the woman accusing the former U.S. president of raping her and then lying about it.

E. Jean Carroll, a former Elle magazine advice columnist, has said Trump maneuvered her into a Bergdorf Goodman department store dressing room in late 1995 or early 1996, after seeking her help in buying lingerie for another woman.

Carroll said that once they were alone, Trump shut the door, forced her against a wall and raped her, until she was able to flee after two or three minutes.

Trump, 76, has forcefully denied raping Carroll, saying she was not his “type” and made up the claim to promote her 2019 memoir, “What Do We Need Men For?”

Carroll, 79, is suing Trump for defamation after he denied her rape claim in an October post on his Truth Social platform.

She is also suing under New York’s Adult Survivors Act, which lets adults sue their alleged abusers long after statutes of limitations have run out.

A six-man, three-woman jury is expected to decide whether to hold Trump liable for damages, and if so how much he owes Carroll in damages.

The trial before U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan in Manhattan is expected to last one to two weeks.

Other possible witnesses for Carroll include two friends in whom she confided about Trump’s alleged rape, and two other women who have accused Trump of sexual assault.

Trump is the Republican front-runner in the 2024 U.S. presidential election.

He is not required to appear at the trial, and his lawyer Joe Tacopina said on Tuesday he was “not sure” whether Trump would testify.

In her opening statement on Tuesday, Shawn Crowley, one of Carroll’s lawyers, told jurors that the evidence made the trial more than a “he said, she said” dispute.

Tacopina countered that the evidence was not there, and that if jurors in heavily Democratic Manhattan did not like Trump they should express themselves at the ballot box, not in court.


Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button