A federal jury has found former
President Donald Trump liable fr
the 1996 sexual abuse and defamn
of former columnist E Jean Carr.
She had accused him of rape,
but the jury rejected that clai.
Trump has now been ordered
to pay her $5 million.
He did not attend the civil trial and
was absent when the verdict was read.
On his social media,
he called the decision a disgra.
Joining us this morning with
what's next is our Nine News
legal analyst Whitney trailer.
Thanks for coming in.
Sure. Good to be here.
So this is really interesting.
Now Trump's lawyer said that
they do plan to appeal.
Can they do that? And if so,
what would that even look like?
Yeah. And appeal is very normal.
They can file an appeal.
And you have to remember at the trial court,
we're dealing with issues of fa.
Did he grab her? Did he do this?
Did he defame her?
And the jury decides that on apl
they're appealing issues of law.
So here the lawyers are going to say,
for example, you shouldn't have
let the two other women testify.
That was an error of law.
And if the appellate court agre,
they can say, Yep,
they shouldn't have been able to testify.
So we're going to send it back down to trial.
With those women not being able to testify,
they could also challenge.
Change the the amount of the
verdict and and and both sides n
actually appeal the plaintiff s.
If the president Trump former
President Trump's team appeals
it's possible that the plaintiff
could appeal something as well
since it's already on its way u.
How
long can that go back and forth?
That's a great question.
It can go on for 20 years becaue
you have to think about it.
Once it goes up to an appeal,
the court says Yep we're going o
remand it now you have another trial.
There's issues of appeal on that trial.
So This is why a lot of
times a plaintiff will or.
And it will win.
And during appeal,
they'll still settle it for less than
they won for because they don'tt
to go through that whole proces.
So it usually doesn't go that l,
but it could, you know,
go on for many years.
Now, a big question that a lot f
people are asking is about the
fact that Trump didn't testify.
Of course, we've seen video that
was recorded back in November,
I believe it was November of last year,
at the end of the last year.
And that seemed you to be some
evidence that a lot of people
were bringing out against him.
Did it hurt him that he
didn't go testify this
time? I think it
did hurt him, but I think it would have been
just as hurtful if he did testify because
you have to understand he is a loose cannon.
And you know, if if I were his lawyer,
I would probably error on the se
of not having him testify becau.
He just goes off the rails. And for example,
so during his deposition testim,
which is still under oath,
that's before trial.
The lawyers get to ask them questions,
court reporters taking everything down.
And he said the most outrageous things like,
yes, a star can grab them by the genitals.
What, fortunately or
unfortunately or fortunately.
He also went when the lawyer,
it was a woman lawyer.
He said, well, you're not my ty,
for example, when he's talking about types.
I mean it was just really bizar.
And so I think that would have n
damaging to keep to have him on the stand
subject to cross examination bee
he would have tried to go all over the
place and his lawyers were proby
very concerned about that happe.
Yeah, well,
in the fact that he didn't test.
So remember,
the plaintiff has the burden of proof,
so she had to prove it just by
preponderance of the evidence,
which means like 51% the fact tt
they didn't put on a single wit,
the defense didn't.
So all they did was cross examie
the plaintiff's witnesses,
which there were 11.
And didn't put on a defense.
So I think the optics also say,
you know, not putting on your own witnesses,
your own doctors,
your own psychologist was was a problem.
It's really interesting because
since this happened, Republican,
lawmakers in Washington have
already talked about, you know,
how this could affect his run for 2024.
Do you think this will impact t?
I think it will politically,
but you have to look at it. I m,
Reagan was known as the Teflon president,
but this is an extreme,
this is Teflon on steroids. I m,
it doesn't matter what he says or does,
whether it's under oath.
And now you have a a jury,
not six men and three women,
an objective jury who's come bak
and said we looked at the facts
and this is what we believe. So.
On one hand, it doesn't matter what happens.
His base gets stronger.
They say this is politically motivated,
you know.
But on the other hand,
you now have this person convic.
This wasn't a criminal trial,
but it was a civil trial.
There was a judge and a jury.
You're going to have the right to appeal if
you think that there was something wrong.
And I'm just talking to the keyd
warriors out there who were goig
to say this is a political hack.
It's all these improper motivat.
Look, our courts of law work.
Our jury system works.
And This is why you got
a right to appeal now.
Well, now we'll have to see firt
what happens with the pill and n
with the presidential election.
Whitney, thank you.