There was another very
dramatic day in a New York
courtroom as Trump accuser
Jean Carroll
took the stand for a second day.
Her allegation
that Trump raped her back in the 1990s.
The subject, a very intense
cross-examination by the former
president's defense team today.
CNN's Paula Reid
is outside
the courthouse in New York for us.
Paula, some extremely heated exchanges,
I take it, in the trial today.
That's right, Wolf.
The whole trial is really on the line
with this cross-examination.
Today,
the jury witness, Trump's
attorney, Joe Tacopina,
grilling Jean Carroll.
At times,
she spoke through tears
as he questioned her
about details of her story
and her motivation
for bringing this case.
Thank you.
Jean Carroll grilled on her allegations
that Donald Trump
raped her in a department store
in the 1990s.
This on the third day
for civil battery and defamation lawsuit
in a federal court in Manhattan.
Trump defense lawyer
Joe Tacopina cross-examined
Carol for hours
today about her story
and her motivations.
Using your own words,
the facts
that you have alleged in the story
you have alleged here are odd.
Tacopina said.
Carroll responded,
Certain parts of the story are difficult
to conceive of.
Yes.
The exchange becoming heated
when Tacopina repeatedly asked
Carroll why
she didn't scream
during the alleged assault.
I'm not a screamer.
I was too much in panic to scream.
You can't beat up on me
for not screaming.
Tacopina shot back,
I'm not beating you up.
I'm asking you questions, Miss Carroll.
Through tears,
Carroll asserted,
I'm telling you, he raped me
whether I screamed or not.
I don't need an excuse for not screaming.
Tacopina, an experienced trial attorney,
also currently defending Trump in
an unrelated criminal case
being brought by Manhattan
District Attorney
Alvin Bragg, is known for his brash style
of defending clients.
No, no, no, it can't be.
This was a federal presidential election.
The allegation here in some
twilight zone sort of scenario.
Outside court,
a Trump
spokesperson said
the case is entirely political.
And Trump himself accuses Carol of lying,
saying her case is, quote,
a made up scam.
Tacopina pressed Carroll on why
she waited
until 2019 to go public with her story.
She said she was mourning
her mother's death.
And then
I thought this may be a way
to change the culture of sexual violence.
The light dawned.
We can actually change things
if we all tell our stories.
And I thought, by God,
this may be the time
the court has wrapped here for the day.
Tacopina told the judge
that he's about halfway
through his cross-examination.
No court tomorrow.
So Carol is expected
to be back on the witness
stand Monday
to face more questions from Trump's
legal team.
Wolf, so many legal challenges
facing Trump right now.
Paula Arena in New York thank you.
I'm joined now by CNN legal
analyst Karen Friedman
and a fellow
a former Manhattan chief
assistant district attorney.
Karen, thanks so much for being with us.
A big day in this case,
maybe the biggest day
with aging, Carol, on the stand
facing cross-examination.
How do you think she held up?
It sounds by all
the reporting that she had,
she held up quite
well under this cross-examination.
But I really think the type
of cross-examination
she was subjected to
is Exhibit A about
why women don't come forward
I mean, just the fact
that she was questioned
about what she did and didn't do,
why she didn't scream
and really making her
feel like she did something wrong
when she was the one who was attacked.
Right.
And she froze
and she did the best
she could in the moment.
But this is the type of
of truly blistering cross-examination
that why
that why women
don't come forward in the first place.
How does what
you describe
as blistering cross-examination?
How does that play
inside the courtroom,
though, Joe Tacopina?
He was actually warned
several times
by the judge to back off
in certain lines of questioning there.
Is that something
the jury takes notice of?
How hot is too hot
Yeah, I think so.
I mean, this is the MeToo movement.
As as E.J.
and Carol
has said,
has really done a lot
in terms of awareness for women
and just people in general,
that there really is
no way
that women are supposed to respond
or there's no perfect way to respond.
People do the best they can.
And when when people like
Joe Tacopina, who is a skilled lawyer,
but in this particular instance,
his method of cross-examining
her really seems questionable to me
that he would
do this
bull in a china shop method
where it's like his victim blaming
victim shaming.
I mean, this isn't.
This is a situation where he's saying
nothing happened.
Not that, oh, it was consensual.
You know,
this is the type of cross-examination
you would expect
someone like Joe Tacopina
to give in a case
where where he's saying
it was consensual,
you were laughing,
you didn't scream, etc.
But instead he's
saying these things to her
that are just actually quite offensive.
And you can tell
that the judge was
was very upset with him.
And and repeatedly struck him down
and told him he was being argumentative
and he was being repetitive
and stopped him
from doing making these arguments.
And the jury will notice that for sure.
Now, the date is Carol
says and has said all along
she can't remember the exact date,
even the year
that this necessarily happened.
Yeah.
How does that play and
how does the fact
that she has been
so forthcoming with that
and I think she and the plaintiffs
were trying to protect her
against cross-examination here,
how do you think that lands?
So I think a lot of the issues
that are being raised, like the dates,
like why you didn't scream etc.
I think that that's why in a prosecution
where you have to beyond reasonable doubt
prove a case,
you would call a sexual assault expert
to the stand
that would talk
about these types of things,
like you might not remember the year
if it was decades ago. Exactly.
But you'll
remember there's certain aspects
of a trauma
that will be seared
in your brain forever.
And it's a well known phenomenon
when it comes to
sexual assault
that there
will be types of information
that that never very never changes
and is truly seared
in your brain forever.
But other things like what year
it was
or the exact date,
what other people
were on the sixth floor,
that was I know that was something that
that Joe Tacopina was was trying to say.
You didn't notice other people there.
Why would she notice other people there?
Right.
She was highly uber focused,
you know,
highly focused on her on her attacker.
And that's those are all things
that that experts
in sexual assault will say is
is entirely consistent with a trauma
such as a sexual assault,
a violent sexual assault like this.
And very quickly,
just remind us the difference
between a civil
and a criminal trial here.
Yeah.
So a criminal case
is a much higher burden.
You have to prove the case
beyond a reasonable doubt.
And there
someone will go to prison potentially
if they're convicted.
A civil
trial is a much lower burden
where it's
a preponderance of the evidence
and the way people describe it,
it's like the scales of justice
you know, are 50 50.
And you put a feather on the scale.
It's like 50.01%
gets you over the finish line,
a preponderance of the evidence.
And in a civil case,
it's about monetary damages.
Karen, Karen Friedman Agnello,
thank you so much for being with us.
Really appreciate it.
Thanks for having me.