In the defamation case of E Jean Carroll, the Trump legal team files a motion for a new trial

Washington: The former president should have a second trial and an opportunity to explain to the jury why he chastised writer E. Jean Carroll for disclosing allegations of sexual assault against him, according to the lawyer’s statement on Tuesday. The claim was made by the attorneys as they reopened objections against the $83.3 million that a Manhattan jury had awarded Carroll in January.

The amount that Trump owes Carroll increased to $88.3 million after a different jury in May of last year awarded $5 million to the seasoned advice columnist. The jury found that Trump had sexually assaulted Carroll in the dressing room of a posh department store in midtown Manhattan in the spring of 1996 and that he had later defamed her with remarks made in October of 2022.

After a magazine published passages from Carroll’s book, Judge Lewis A. Kaplan directed the January jury to accept the conclusions of the previous panel and determine solely how much Trump owes Carroll for two remarks he made in 2019. Carroll claimed that after receiving threats from strangers on the internet, the remarks destroyed her job and made her worry for her life.

Though he did not show up for the trial in May, Trump was a constant presence this year, often shaking his head and complaining loudly enough from his place at the defense table for the prosecution to claim that the jury could hear him.

The Republican presidential front-runner’s testimony was significantly curtailed by Kaplan, who threatened to remove Trump from the courtroom. Trump’s criticism of Carroll, 80, persisted from the campaign trail throughout the trial, supplying Carroll’s attorneys with new evidence to present to the jury.

The attorneys said that “a new trial is warranted because this Court’s erroneous decision to dramatically limit the scope of President Trump’s testimony almost certainly influenced the jury’s verdict.”

Trump’s attorneys said that the president need to provide an explanation for his remarks against Carroll.

According to the attorneys, Trump had many strong justifications for openly refuting Carroll’s allegations.

It is almost unimaginable that President Trump’s “sole” and “one and only” motivation for making the disputed remarks was to hurt Plaintiff, rather than to uphold his reputation, keep his family safe, and maintain his presidency, they said.

Trump mocked Carroll in 2019 and claimed that he had never met her, despite a 1987 picture showing them with their then-spouses at a social gathering. Carroll was accused of “totally lying” to promote a book. He said that the picture caught him in the act of standing in a queue. Carroll said that he had dubbed her a “whack job” and implied that she wasn’t “his type,” implying that she was too attractive to be raped.

Carroll’s attorney did not respond to a message requesting comment right away.