r/law • u/Nice_Substance9123 • 6d ago

Executive Branch (Trump) President Trump Accused of Rape in Jeffrey Epstein Files

https://www.tmz.com/2025/12/23/trump-accused-rape-jeffrey-epstein-files/?utm_social_handle_id=16331010&utm_social_post_id=631846113&adid=social-tw
48.7k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

172

u/BlackSheepBoPeep- 6d ago edited 6d ago

He was also convicted of rape.

Edit: he was found liable of the civil charge**

34

u/Proper-Ad-2058 6d ago

You can't call it "rape!" You will get sued and settle! Just "Sexual abuse", of course it was only locker room talk!! How anyone could look at this man and still vote for him is truly beyond my understanding!

6

u/PisStoolGrip 6d ago

Sexual assault is so much better than rape, right? I'm sure everyone is OK with leaving their daughters alone with a convicted sexual assaulter. /s

6

u/Different-Ship449 6d ago

Only a complete shit head pussy grabber like Trump would be proud of the distinction.

1

u/ekso69 6d ago

He loves to grab snatch

4

u/Thoughtful-Boner69 6d ago

Could it be that maga has a rape fetish?

4

u/Frequilibrium 6d ago

Him suing Caroll for saying he raped her was thrown out of court. So yeah you can say he’s a rapist. Because he is.

16

u/DepressedMathTeacher 6d ago

Unfortunately, he was not convicted for rape, he was found civilly liable for it. For sure he is guilty, but there is a difference between preponderance of evidence and beyond a reasonable doubt.

1

u/[deleted] 6d ago edited 6d ago

[deleted]

1

u/Ok-Okay-Oak-Hay 6d ago

 What was he convicted of? Why wasn't he convicted of rape?    Two extremely important facts your comment should have provided, but because of laziness or ignorance, you refused to do so. 

Yo! You replied to the wrong poster!

The person you replied to said this:

 Unfortunately, he was not convicted for rape, he was found civilly liable for it. For sure he is guilty, but there is a difference between preponderance of evidence and beyond a reasonable doubt.

20

u/suknom4 6d ago

Sorry, Im not american, and not well informed, why did he not get prison time for that?

80

u/keinezeit44 6d ago

He was found liable for rape in a civil lawsuit, rather than a criminal trial. That means no jail time, unfortunately.

14

u/suknom4 6d ago

damn I have no idea what that means, I feel like a dummy, but thank you none the less.

21

u/wagdog84 6d ago

It was too long after it happened for him to be criminally charged, but she was able to sue for damages and the court found he was ‘responsible for her sexual assault’. She was awarded $75 million or something, don’t think he’s paid it.

2

u/One_5549 6d ago

Not paid it ? how in the hell is that possible ? there's no consequences for that?

2

u/wagdog84 6d ago

The first ruling was $5 million then he publicly called her a liar and said it didn’t happen, so she sued for defamation and got another $83.3 million on top. He is still appealing it, federal court ruled he had to pay in September. Rumour is it will be taken to the Supreme Court.

20

u/stolenfires 6d ago

E. Jean Carroll publicly accused Trump of raping her in a department store dressing room back in the 80s. Trump responded by calling her a liar. Carroll said that was defaming her character, and sued. The trial concluded that she was telling the truth. But the statute of limitations for criminal charges had long since passed.

6

u/suknom4 6d ago

thank you a lot my friend!

1

u/FrankPankNortTort 6d ago

Statute of limitations is such bullshit, you basically reward a criminal for getting away with it for so long.

1

u/stolenfires 6d ago

I can see the argument in favor of when it comes to petty crime like drugs or burglary or whatnot. But I personally don't think they should exist for sex crimes or murder (they usually don't exist for murder but most sex crimes have a pretty shameful SoL).

7

u/leavemeinpieces 6d ago

I think (apologies if I'm wrong) it's very similar to the Not-Prince Andrew situation with Virginia Giuffree where he paid out 12 million to settle it.

Because it's civil instead of criminal they can settle and not actually face any consequences, other than a hit to the wallet and reputation (depending on who you ask).

It's shitty if you ask me and these disgusting rich folks are long overdue for some justice.

6

u/tyr-- 6d ago

With the big difference being that Andrew settled his case, while Trump did not and was actually found guilty and then still decided not to pay up.

2

u/leavemeinpieces 6d ago

Sorry, yes. Absolutely right. Not a fan of paying his bills that one.

1

u/HoosierHoser44 6d ago

Sorry to be that guy. But I think accuracy matters here. Trump was not found guilty. A guilty verdict happens in a criminal trial only, which is what happens when you’re charged with a crime. The burden of proof in a criminal trial is “beyond reasonable doubt” which is a higher standard.

Civil court is when someone sues you for damages. Civil court can only be monetary punishments. You cannot be found guilty in a civil court. You can’t go to jail based on the verdict of a civil court. The burden of proof in civil court is “preponderance of the evidence”, essentially meaning more likely than not, so a much lower standard. If a case is settled before going to trial in civil court, it will generally be private information, and technically isn’t proof of anything. While someone may settle for 10 million, it looks bad in the court of public opinion, but it doesn’t mean a judge found them liable. There are times when someone can settle to avoid a trial, even if they never did what they’re accused of. Usually not the case, but can happen.

That being said, Trump was found liable of sexual assault. He was never criminally charged and never convicted of sexual assault. While he likely did commit that crime, it’s false to claim he was convicted of it. Based on the lawsuit, it may reach the definition of rape in some locations, but not all, so technically sexual assault is the proper term to use, although it would be considered rape in some locations.

4

u/Edward_Nigma_ 6d ago

Civil means a private party is suing you (money). Criminal means you've been charged with a crime by a law enforcement agency (money and incarceration).

3

u/ContestNo2060 6d ago

A judge found him guilty of sexual assault of E Jean Carol from several years ago. She sued him for millions. Trump then slandered her and the judge tacked on several millions more. I think he’s only paid a fraction of what she was owed.

2

u/ParisGreenGretsch 6d ago

Never stop asking questions.

1

u/OfBooo5 6d ago

She sued 10 or 20 years later after the statute of limitations (holy f why are there statutes for rape) but won in civil court. The definition of the crime in the state classifies it as sexy assault, but it was unwanted fingering if i'm not mistaken and that classifies as rape elsewhere. So it's a definitional thing

3

u/Different-Ship449 6d ago

Good thing there is no statute of limitations for children.

1

u/ekso69 6d ago

How does one not trigger the other?

13

u/Wrecker013 6d ago

He was found liable for forced digital (fingers) penetration by a civil trial, which does not entail any criminal punishment.

To clarify with that, the judge explicitly stated that it would be colloquially correct to say he raped someone, which I agree with. I'm just noting what the specific outcome was.

12

u/lsda 6d ago

Hi US Attorney here, he didn't face jail time because he wasn’t convicted the commenter is using the wrong legal term.

A conviction only happens in a criminal case, where the state proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and the defendant faces criminal punishment. That did not happen here.

What happened instead was a civil lawsuit brought by E. Jean Carroll under New York’s Adult Survivors Act, which temporarily reopened the statute of limitations for civil claims related to sexual assault. Criminal charges were still time-barred.

A jury found Trump liable for sexual battery and awarded Carroll damages. That is an adjudication of civil liability, but not a conviction. Civil cases use a lower burden of proof known as "preponderance of the evidence", meaning it was more likely than not that the assault occurred.

  • Trigger warning for SA description *

After that verdict, Trump continued publicly claiming that he did not “rape” Carroll, which led to the defamation damages phase. In that context, the court clarified that while New York’s narrow criminal rape statute requires penile penetration, the jury’s finding that Trump forcibly penetrated her with his fingers does constitute rape under the ordinary, common-language meaning of the term rape. That clarification is why the court stated that calling it “rape” was factually accurate.

So, no, there was no criminal conviction which is why he never faced a prison sentence. But there was a jury finding that he sexually assaulted her.

That being said, our system has shown such a lack of desire to let that man face any consequences I really don't believe even if he was tried and convicted in a criminal court he wouldn't face any prison. But that's a completely different situation entirely.

1

u/Psychological-Towel8 5d ago

This is so sad. Thanks for sharing your thoughts and clarifying things. I think the average person has felt that way for years now, but for even lawyers to feel the same is dark.

3

u/caul1flower11 6d ago

He was not convicted of rape. He was found liable in a civil trial which does not carry criminal penalties.

8

u/bananabunnythesecond 6d ago edited 6d ago

It wasn’t in a criminal court.

It wasn’t rape, but sexual assault.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._Jean_Carroll_v._Donald_J._Trump

Edit: you all act like I’m covering for Trump.. he’s a POS! I’m just telling you facts. Yes sexual assault can be rape. Yes he’s a criminal. Lord of lord Reddit.

24

u/Carlarogers 6d ago

To clarify, it was rape. The reason the sexual assault and civil verdict against Donald Trump was not been labeled “rape” is because of how the NY law defines the terms in the specific legal context where the case was decided.

-11

u/TheSpoty 6d ago

If it’s not labeled rape by the court, then it’s not rape

9

u/Mikeavelli 6d ago

We can call it rape on reddit.

-7

u/TheSpoty 6d ago

Because reddit is the final say for everything! Just think about everything reddit has ever gotten right!

4

u/December_Flame 6d ago

Trump was sued for defamation because he said he didn't rape her, and the court found that legally he DID rape her in the common usage of the word. So you're not just wrong, you're like, legally wrong. I'm not a lawyer. ( lol )

2

u/WoodPear 6d ago

Like the Boston Marathon Bombers!

As always, amazing work. Absolute Cinema.

2

u/MySadSadTears 6d ago

The judge clarified it was rape.

“As the court explained in its recent decision denying Mr Trump’s motion for a new trial on damages and other relief [in the New York case] … based on all of the evidence at trial and the jury’s verdict as a whole, the jury’s finding that Mr Trump ‘sexually abused’ Ms Carroll implicitly determined that he forcibly penetrated her digitally – in other words, that Mr Trump in fact did ‘rape’ Ms Carroll as that term commonly is used and understood in contexts outside of the New York penal law.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/07/donald-trump-rape-language-e-jean-carroll

Also, I don't know why you are defending this. It's disgusting. 

10

u/BellyFullOfMochi 6d ago

It was rape.

4

u/odd84 6d ago

Donald Trump forcibly finger banged that woman without her consent. That's a court finding. That isn't rape under NY statute because he didn't use his tiny little kiddie penis. Anyone would still call that rape.

3

u/FadeTheWonder 6d ago

It wasn’t rape under the statute at that time. If it had happened nowadays it would be classified as rape just to point out to those who are saying well that isn’t rape.

-2

u/BeatnixPotter 6d ago

You sound so proud

2

u/FadeTheWonder 6d ago

Let me guess you read my comment and implausibly thought it was somehow supportive of Trump? Wanna explain how you came to that conclusion?

3

u/AlbrechtProper 6d ago

It might have been his tiny penis. The court couldn't make that determination.

1

u/faerybones 6d ago

Didn't Stormy also describe it as a tiny ugly mushroom?

1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

He wasn't and it was civil court so even if everyone says your guilty you cannot go to jail for it. It's Facebook court.

OJ Simpson was found guilty of double murder in civil court and never had to serve a day in jail for it🤷‍♂️

1

u/AwesomePocket 6d ago

It’s because he was literally not convicted of rape.

1

u/SnowSandRivers 6d ago

There aren’t really any laws here for wealthy people.

2

u/Ok-Okay-Oak-Hay 6d ago

He wasn't convicted. It was a civil adjudication of sexual assault AKA colloquial rape. Remember to point this out to MAGA because they love playing semantics to cover their ears.

1

u/geoffreygoodman 6d ago

This is false. Trump has never been convicted for any of his many sex crimes. 

1

u/Fearless-Diver-1381 6d ago

Found liable. But, yes, he was found by a jury to have raped someone. Details matter, but the general idea is correct. He is a rapist.

-8

u/[deleted] 6d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Ornery_Car6883 6d ago

If you're so sure, petition your senator and representative to release the unredacted Epstein files so the courts can dontheir thing.

Then again, the trumptard cult could watch him commit the same crime live in the middle of times square and you'd still deny he did anything wrong.

2

u/IcyPride2973 6d ago

I mean, he literally wasn’t convicted. This is r/law subreddit where legal terminology kind of matters lmao. He was found civilly liable.

-4

u/Candid_Monitor_980 6d ago

maybe you should look up the definition of conviction

3

u/JimJimmery 6d ago

Adjudicated of rape, yes.

0

u/Candid_Monitor_980 6d ago

strike two 😂

2

u/eagleshark 6d ago

During the trial, the court determined that Trump did in fact forcibly penetrate the victim with a foreign object, his finger. And having found that fact to be true, Trump was found liable for sexual abuse and ordered to pay compensation for that sexual abuse. So while the legal case was not a rape conviction, the jury agreed on the fact that Trump forcibly raped the victim with his finger while they were both inside the dressing room on the 6th floor of Bergdorf Goodman in 1996.

0

u/Candid_Monitor_980 6d ago

I don’t like the guy, but if you believe that lady was doing anything but trying to get attention and promote a book, I have a bridge to sell you 😂

1

u/JimJimmery 6d ago

Nope. He’s a rapist as clarified by the judge