Former President Trump attended the civil trial in Manhattan to determine the amount of damages he must pay to E. Jean Carroll for remarks he made in 2019 denying her sexual assault allegations. This marked the first time in decades that Trump and Carroll were in the same room. The jury selection took place earlier in the day, resulting in a nine-person jury that will remain anonymous for their safety.
It is important to note that Trump's presence at the trial was voluntary, as he is not required to attend this stage of the case. However, he has chosen to attend multiple court proceedings over the past 10 days, including oral arguments in federal court and a civil case in New York. It appears that Trump believes there is some benefit to be gained by attending these trials, possibly to amplify the narrative that he is a victim of an unfair judicial system.
During the trial, Trump's lawyer and spokesperson, Alina Hava, sparred with the judge over their request to reschedule court on Thursday due to Trump's mother-in-law's funeral. The judge had already denied a similar request to postpone the entire trial. It seemed that Hava's argument was aimed more at the court of public opinion rather than a legal strategy, as the judge pointed out that Trump's attendance was not necessary and it was his choice whether to attend court or the funeral.
While Trump's presence may be seen as grandstanding or part of a political campaign, it is not a legal strategy. The trial is focused on determining the extent of damages for defamation, as Trump has been found to have defamed Carroll by denying the sexual assault allegations and making disparaging comments about her. The jury will consider the severity of the impact on the victim based on the nature of the statements made.
Carroll's legal team requested preconditions on Trump's behavior during the trial, as he had recently gone off on a monologue during a closing argument in his civil fraud trial. However, the judge did not impose such conditions, emphasizing the parties' right to free speech and to advocate on their own behalf. This decision is in line with the judicial reluctance to intervene in parties' actions or speech during legal proceedings.
In cases of defamation, a jury must determine the monetary value of the damages. Factors such as the stature of the speaker, the status of the victim, and the extent of harm caused are considered. Carroll will present her case to the jury, arguing that Trump's statements have devalued her brand, name, and reputation. Evaluating the subjective nature of these damages is a challenging task for juries and lawyers involved in defamation cases.
As the trial continues, the focus will be on determining the appropriate amount of damages that Trump should pay to Carroll for the harm caused by his defamatory statements.
