This had dawned on me a few months ago, after E. Jean Carroll won her case against Trump.
Now, Trump’s repeated assaults of women has been brought up again for his first criminal trial.
Look…….
A judge in Donald Trump’s hush money trial denied prosecutors' request on Monday that they be permitted to use as evidence allegations of sexual assault against the former president related to the infamous Access Hollywood tape.
Judge Juan Merchan said such allegations amounted to "rumors" that would be prejudicial toward Trump, according to reports from the Manhattan courtroom.
"They are very prejudicial, and at this point, given what we know today, it was just a rumor," Merchan said.
Much like Justice Merchan, I don’t want to subject you to the actual tape (but for different reasons). Merchan excluded the playing of the tape in Trump’s NY trial, because it would prejudice the jury.
He IS allowing a transcript of the video to be shown to the jury by the Prosecution.
“This Court rules that the proper balance lies in allowing the People to elicit testimony about a videotaped interview which surfaced on October 7, 2016, that contained comments of a sexual nature which Defendant feared could hurt his presidential aspirations," Merchan wrote. "However, it is not necessary that the tape itself be introduced into evidence or that it be played for the jury.”
"They are very prejudicial, and at this point, given what we know today, it was just a rumor," Merchan said.
...it was just a rumor…
It isn’t a rumor when a jury has come to a verdict that it has happened.
And I’m sorry but, “prejudicial?” A man that has been adjudicated, not just for sexual assault, but for EXACTLY the kind of sexual assault he talked about in the tape. Remember, Trump said he didn’t insert his mushroom. And E. Jean Carroll said she didn’t know what penetrated, but SOMETHING did.
So even a Justice in the NY court system hasn’t made the connection between what Trump bragged about, and what he was QUITE RECENTLY adjudicated for? TWICE!!!
And yes, I am fully aware that a judge can disallow evidence which is presented for the purpose of showing a propensity to commit an act, but he CAN admit evidence for the objective of demonstrating motive.
But it isn’t f*cking prejudicial, after it’s proven by a jury, in court, that he had already done it.
That tape came out in October, 2016…….
It was recorded in September, 2005
Trump raw-dogged Stormy Daniels in July, 2006.
Barron Trump was 4 months old.
Trump’s assault of E. Jean took place before that.
Trump sexually assaulted E. Jean Carroll in the 90’s.
Trump was describing to Billy Bush what he’d already done. Apparently, dozens of times.
But even prosector Steinglass, while arguing to have the full tape admitted as evidence, didn’t bring this up.
Can someone please tell me what I’m missing?
RUMOR??? WTF?