The Daily - Trump Liable for Sexual Abuse

Episode Date: May 10, 2023

This episode contains detailed descriptions of sexual assault.A jury in Manhattan has found former President Donald J. Trump legally liable for sexually abusing and defaming the writer E. Jean Carroll.Ben Weiser, who covers the Manhattan federal courts for The Times, tells the story of how a nearly 30-year-old case reached this moment.Guest: Benjamin Weiser, a correspondent for The New York Times covering the Manhattan federal courts.Background reading: More than a dozen women have accused Mr. Trump of sexual misconduct, but this civil case is the only one to have been tested before a jury.The former president’s new campaign is rolling forward unimpeded. In quiet courtrooms, he faces more serious threats.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.

From New York Times, I'm Michael Barbaro. This is The Daily. Today, a jury in Manhattan has found former President Donald Trump legally liable for sexually abusing and defaming the writer E. Jean Carroll and has ordered him to pay her millions of dollars in damages. My colleague Ben Weiser tells the story of how a nearly 30-year-old allegation reached this moment. It's Wednesday, May 10th. Ben, good evening. I know it's late. It's 8, 10 p.m., so thank you for making time for us.

Of course, Michael. Can you just describe where exactly you are? Can you just describe where exactly you are? Yes, Michael. I am presently in the press room of the federal courthouse for the Southern District of New York in Lower Manhattan, where we just finished covering a major trial, the trial over the lawsuit brought by E. Jean Carroll, who had sued Donald Trump, accusing him of rape. And I want to get to that case, that trial, and ultimately to the verdict and what it means. But I want to start with, Ben, the unexpected and in a lot of ways improbable legal journey that brought E. Jean Carroll's case to this point. So tell us that story. This case stemmed from an incident that occurred in the mid-1990s when E. Jean Carroll, a prominent advice columnist for Elle magazine in New York, said that she had a chance encounter with Donald Trump. Yeah, well, thank you for your trust and for this. I think it's really important.

I think it's really important. Right. And of course, our colleague Megan Toohey actually interviewed E. Jean Carroll about this allegation for an episode of The Daily that ran back in 2019. That's right. Can you walk us through what happened this particular day? You had been at the studio where you and Carroll were. Yes, and I wanted to shop for something. I can't remember what it was. for something. I can't remember what it was. She went shopping after work at Bergdorf Goodman, a very, you know, luxury department store on Fifth Avenue

in Manhattan. He was standing outside and it was dark. So it must have been 6.30, maybe 7. He went like this when he saw me through the door. He was like, stand there and stop me. Made a gesture, like held up his hand. Yeah, held the hand like that. And as she's leaving right through a

revolving glass door, she bumps into Donald Trump. And he came to the door. He said, you're that advice lady. And I said, you're that real estate mogul. He said, come advise me. I want to get a gift. I was like, this is charming. Oh boy. I said, yes. I asked him who it was for. He said a girl. And Trump said he was there to buy a present for a girl. That was what she said. And asked Carol, the advice columnist, to advise him. And I am just having such an engaging time because I have Donald Trump in tow. And he is asking for my advice. I'm like thrilled that this is happening. Why are you so thrilled? Because it's Donald Trump and I've got it just delicious because he asked me for my advice.

It's for a girl right up my alley. I'm just thinking this is it. You know, E.J. Carroll had also once written for Saturday Night Live. And as she said, she thought this would just be a great story to tell her friends later. And at that point, he said lingerie. Or he may have said panties. He may have said underwear. But I had the impression we started to go up the escalator.

We went to whatever floor the lingerie was on. And we walked in. There was a counter on the left. And there was nobody there. And it looked like a filmy, sort of see-through gray. And when he picked it up, I could see it was a bodysuit. And he said, go put this on. I said, you put it on.

And then the scene really started. I'm thinking, this is terrific. This is terrific. He says, it looks like it would fit you. I said, no, it goes with your eyes. And there was a little bit of banter back and forth, which I was loving. And I was laughing.

And he went like this towards the dressing room. And I'm thinking, I'm actually laughing out loud thinking, I'm going to make him put these bodysuits over his pants. That is the scheme. And I'm thinking it's going to be the funniest thing I have ever seen. I've got a picture in my head of him going like this and putting it on. That's what I'm thinking. And we walk in the dressing room.

I'm in front of it. I pass in front of him. He shuts the door and just pushes me against the wall. Boom. And kissed me. And I was continuing to laugh. And that's when I started

to push him back. And that's when he started to lean forward, and that's when he put his weight against me. And he has two free hands because his shoulder's here. His shoulder's leaning into you? Yeah, holding me against the thing. And one of his hands went under in between the flaps of my coat and pulled down my tights not off but way down and he ran his fingers around looking anyway whatever he was doing he was looking for my vagina i guess

assuming that hurt and so it had to be with the other hand as he held me he unzipped his pants now he could have unbuckled him i don't't know. He could have unbuttoned them. But pretty soon he had the tight stem, his penis in his hand, and inserted it briefly. I don't think it was all the way. I don't. And it was not long. Let's not put a time limit on it. I'm struggling. How long could it be? It couldn't not long. Let's not put a time limit on it. I'm struggling.

How long could it be? It couldn't be long. And what did you do next? I may have tried to hit him with my purse. I don't know. I don't know what I did with this hand. I have no idea. The thing I clearly remember is this.

That's what I clearly remember. Trying to stomp his knee? I have to get my knee up to get him off. Right? I got this knee up just slightly enough to back up. I didn't say a word. Anyway, so push him up, back up. And then I just went down and out.

Either went in the escalator or the elevator. I don't know. She struggles to break free and ultimately does and flees the store. And her first instinct is to call one of her close friends, Lisa Bernbach, a journalist and author in New York. And she recounts exactly what happened. Lisa tells her, go to the police. You've been raped.

She talked to another friend, Carol Martin, a day later, a news anchor in New York. She said, don't go to the police. You've been raped. She talked to another friend, Carol Martin, a day later, a news anchor in New York. She said, don't go to the police. Donald Trump has hundreds of lawyers that will bury you. And that's the route she took. She decided to tell nobody. She swore her friends to secrecy and kept that secret for more than 20 years. And so it's not until 2019 when she writes a book about women's bad experiences with men that she includes her own story with Mr. Trump. And that section is excerpted in New York Magazine before the book comes out, and it is published in June. And that is the first time that E. Jean Carroll went public with her allegation that Trump had raped her. I remember reading that piece. We all read that piece. Donald Trump was president at the time, and it was a bombshell excerpt from her book. That's right. And Trump attacks her viciously. He says it never happened. And he adds, you know, she's not my

type. But E. Jean Carroll was unable to hold Trump legally accountable for this alleged attack. The statute of limitations for criminal action had long run. And many women in New York and elsewhere who claim they've been sexually assaulted, and in many cases years ago, were in a similar situation. But then everything changed in New York. State lawmakers who were moved by allegations from all kinds of women, certainly also by the force of the Me Too movement, draft a very unusual law. And it grants people who say they are survivors of sexual offenses a new one-year window in which they can file a lawsuit alleging abuse, sexual abuse, even if it occurred decades ago. And even if before this law was passed, the statute of limitations would have barred

any such legal action. And you know, Michael, one of the key proponents of this law was E. Jean Carroll. And when lawmakers were considering creating this law, she went to Albany, spoke at a news conference at the Capitol alongside sexual abuse survivors, and she sent passionate letters to assembly members calling for the law to be passed. She said in one of them, I stayed silent for years after I was attacked. And by staying silent, lost my chance to hold my attacker accountable. And then. Good morning. I wanted to make sure we start approximately on time because people have waited long enough.

That law did pass. I'm so proud in a matter of minutes that I'll sign the Adult Survivors Act with our incredible sponsors. It creates a one-year look-back window for adults. And that one-year window in which sex abuse survivors could file a lawsuit opened on Thanksgiving Day, November 24th of 2022. And I checked the court docket, and sure enough, minutes after midnight, E. Jean Carroll filed a lawsuit under the new law against Donald Trump, accusing him of rape. But there's an important caveat to this law.

It allows only for civil suits, not criminal charges. There's no police arresting anybody. It doesn't put anyone behind bars. But it does allow a survivor of sexual abuse to seek damages and try to hold their abuser accountable, financially and also reputationally. and try to hold their abuser accountable, financially and also reputationally. So very interestingly, E. Jean Carroll can now use this law that she's personally pushed for and has now passed to hold Donald Trump accountable for this alleged rape

in a way that, without this law, would not have been legally possible. That's right. But, you know, it's one thing to be able to bring a lawsuit. It's another thing to prove it, especially when it's an allegation that dates back decades. We'll be right back. So then tell us about this trial, this civil trial, and what the legal burdens are for E. Jean Carroll exactly. Michael, you know, in a criminal case, the standard of proof is very high to find somebody guilty of a crime. We all know it is called beyond a reasonable doubt. But in a civil case, which this is term that means an assault and covers the alleged rape. She merely had to prove by a preponderance of the evidence, which as the judge pointed out today, simply means

more likely than not. Some people say it's like one-tenth of a percent more than 50% possible. So as you can see, it's a much lower standard of proof than would be needed at a criminal trial. Got it. And as this case was filed, it also included an account of defamation. Ms. Carroll said that Donald Trump had defamed her, harmed her reputation because of statements he posted last October on his social media account, Truth Social, when he called her case a complete con job, a hoax, and a lie. And he said, and while I'm not supposed to say it, I will. This woman is not my type. He reiterated that. And so this lawsuit went to trial a couple weeks ago in the federal court

here on two counts. One was battery, the accusation that he had raped her, and the other was defamation. And the suit sought damages, money damages, for these two acts. So once this trial starts, what is the case that E. Jean Carroll and her lawyers present to the jury? The case begins with E. Jean Carroll herself. She's the main witness in the case. She testifies over several days, and she tells her story in graphic detail about what happened. And the rest of the trial was largely witnesses, another 10 or so, called by her lawyers, who all bolster her account in some way or another. The two friends that she talked to immediately after the assault, they completely confirmed that she had told them about it those days right afterwards. So even though this is nearly 30 years old, there is a contemporaneous account essentially given by two friends, and they describe in different ways how she told them what had happened. And it's largely the story she told the jury earlier. Right. And as we've come to understand, contemporaneous accounts, you know, people who And two other witnesses who appeared testified at the trial that they were also assaulted by Donald Trump years ago. One, Jessica Leeds, a former stockbroker,

testified that Trump had groped her and kissed her without her consent on an airplane in the 1970s. And Natasha Stoyanov, a former writer for People magazine, said that when she was at Mar-a-Lago interviewing Trump, he lured her into a room, pushed her against the wall, and kissed her without her consent. Those two accounts had enough relevance to Ms. Carroll's allegation that the judge allowed both of those women to testify on her behalf. Got it. Presumably because the judge felt that they might help establish a pattern. That's right, Michael. And in addition to witnesses who were called by E.J. and Carol, you know, the one man who was not at the trial, Donald Trump, made his presence known in several

ways. One was a tape that by now is notorious, and probably everybody's heard of it, the so-called Access Hollywood tape. You know, I'm automatically attracted to beautiful. I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Which surfaced in 2016. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Whatever you want. Grab them by the pussy. And on it, Trump brags in crude terms about his ability to grab the genitals of women. And Ms. Carroll's lawyers played it because what Donald Trump actually says in that tape,

in some ways, again, supports E.J. Carroll's argument that that's what he did to her. And I might add that E.J. Carroll's lawyers deposed Donald Trump last fall, asked him questions under oath, and he was videotaped and he also appeared in that video at the trial. They played it for the jury. Are you familiar, I'm sure you are, with something that's often referred to as the Access Hollywood tape? Yes, I am. And Carroll's lawyers asked him in their deposition, in that video deposition, about his claim that as a celebrity, as a star, as he put it, he was able to grab women by the genitals. You could do anything. That's what you said, correct? Well, historically, that's true with stars. And his response was, well, historically,

that's true with stars. And so the lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, poor Miss Carroll, says, it's true with stars? And Trump says, well, that's what, if you look over the last million years, I guess that's been largely true. Not always, but largely true. Unfortunately or fortunately. I guess that's been largely true. And then he says, unfortunately or fortunately. I guess that's been largely true.

And then he says, unfortunately or fortunately. And that's what the jury heard him say and watched him say at the trial. So in a sense, by the time E. Jean Carroll's presentation is finished, they have established her claim. They have established that it's been corroborated contemporaneously in conversations with friends. They have established that Donald Trump has allegedly done this to other women. And they have shown a video in which Donald Trump talks about his feeling that he can do this kind of thing to women. And then in a deposition, he doesn't really deny having said it or the fundamental sentiment that it represents. That's right. So then what about the defense?

What kind of a defense does Donald Trump mount in this civil case? So Trump's lawyers presented no witnesses on his behalf. None. None. And of course, Donald Trump himself, who could have been a witness, did not come to the court. He did not attend the trial, and he did not testify on his own behalf. Do you understand why that was their strategy? Well, it's still unclear to me if the defense really wanted Donald Trump to testify. You know, I'm not sure, given his position, his total denial that this happened, how much more he

would have added. Trump was not acknowledging he'd even seen E.J. Caroller, been with her that night at the store. And his own lawyer, Joseph Takapino, essentially said that he didn't need witnesses. And Takapino told the jury, who would we even call for the witness stand? How do you prove a negative? But without any witnesses on his behalf, essentially the defense presented by Donald Trump and through his lawyer, Joseph Takapina,

was carried out through cross-examination of Ms. Carroll and her witnesses. With Ms. Carroll, Mr. Takapina focused on the fact that she had not gone to the police, that this attack had occurred in a very popular luxury department store where nobody had been there to see it. He highlighted also the fact that she couldn't actually remember the precise date this occurred. In the lawsuit, Ms. Carroll simply said that the rape had occurred sometime in the mid-1990s, 1995, 1996. In the trial, she was able to down to early spring of 1996, but there was no day. And essentially, Takapina was saying, this is such an important thing that happened, you can't even tell us when it happened. And one of the most heated moments during the trial was

during Mr. Takapina's cross-examination of Ms. Carroll, when he basically asked why she had not screamed for help. And he went through a series of questions, and she finally said, I'm not a screamer. She said she was in a panic. She was fighting. She said, you can't beat up on me for not screaming. And Mr. Takapina said he wasn't beating up on her. But Ms. Carroll, her voice rising, said from the witness stand that women often keep silent about an attack because they fear being asked what they could have done to stop it. They're always asked, why don't you scream? And she said, I'm telling you, he raped me whether I screamed or not. So Trump's lawyer, and it's not clear that it's hugely successful, is trying to portray E. Jean Carroll as an untrustworthy teller of this story. In his view, this lawsuit was a scam and that Ms. Carroll had brought it for status and

political reasons. And he argued that she was doing just fine. You know, she had gotten a lot of publicity for her book and had gotten more well-known. And he said that Donald Trump doesn't have a story to tell here other than to say it's a lie. And that pretty much summed up the argument he made. it's a lie. And that pretty much summed up the argument he made. I'm curious what you were thinking, Ben, as this case comes to a close and gets handed to the jury.

You always think when you're watching a case, you know, how will the jury react? And what made this such a mystery is that for some very specific reasons, and unlike most trials, Michael, this jury was completely anonymous. Usually we can find out the names of jurors and something about them when they're being interviewed in the pre-trial jury selection process. But the judge here expressed concern that if the jurors' identities were known, they could possibly be subject to harassment or worse by supporters of Mr. Trump or by anybody who was unhappy with the decision. So Ben, that brings us to Tuesday morning. The jury has the case. I had expected them to need a lot of time. They didn't. They needed just a few hours. That's right. In less

than three hours, they came back with a verdict. There were no notes, no questions. No one was asking for testimony to be read back. The jury came back very quickly for any case, but certainly for this kind of case with a verdict. And just walk us through that verdict, because it's a little bit complicated. So when the jury took the case, they had a lot of questions before them. But in essence, it asked, did Ms. Carroll prove by a preponderance of the evidence, which is to say more likely than not, that Mr. Trump had raped Ms. Carroll as she accused him or something less? And the option was given of sexually abusing Ms. Carroll. And that's what the jury chose. They did not say he raped her, but they said that she had proven that he had

sexually abused her, which also meant that they believed that the two of them had been at the store together and that Trump had assaulted her, which you remember, he denied everything. He denied even knowing her, being at the store, or any aspect of her allegation. Got it. The jury also went through a series of questions on the defamation claim that she had filed and ultimately found that he had defamed her. And eventually, when you add it all up, awarded her $5 million in damages to compensate her for both the impact of the sexual abuse, as well as the harm to her reputation that was done by the defamatory statements on Truth Social. Ben, how did you interpret that ultimate verdict?

How do you make sense of it? Michael, of course, we don't know for sure. We can't talk to the jurors. As I said, they were anonymous. But even though the jury did not find that Trump raped Ms. Carroll and instead found that he sexually abused her, overwhelmingly, I think this is a verdict against him. And E. Jean Carroll certainly saw this as a victory today.

She said after court in a statement, I filed this lawsuit against Trump to clear my name and get my life back. And she said, today the world finally knows the truth. Ben, it strikes me that you have now covered several of the most important cases stemming from the Me Too movement. The case of Jeffrey Epstein, the alleged serial abuser of young women, and the trial of his longtime partner, Ghislaine Maxwell, and now Trump. And when we think about the meaning of the Me Too movement, it ultimately is holding powerful people, mostly men, accountable for how they treat women. And it's hard to think of anyone more powerful

than the former president of the United States. That's right. And, you know, there's been a lot achieved in recent years. And certainly the Me Too movement has made its force felt in a very important way. But this is a first. This is a former president of the United States who had been accused by multiple women over the years of sexual misconduct. And for the first time, one of those women has been able to hold him accountable in a trial in a federal court. And wherever this goes and whatever other cases are brought, there's no question that it's a kind of milestone, I would think, legally and socially, and it's going to resonate. and it's going to resonate. Well, Ben, thank you very much.

We appreciate it. Thank you, Michael, for having me. On Tuesday night, Trump said that he planned to appeal the jury's verdict. Meanwhile, one of the New York legislators who wrote the law that allowed E. Jean Carroll to sue Trump, State Senator Brad Hoylman, said that the verdict demonstrated why the law was needed. Hoylman said, quote,

There should be no limit on survivors bringing their abusers to justice. We'll be right back. Here's what else you need to know today. On Tuesday night, President Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy emerged from a high-stakes meeting at the White House with no consensus on how to avoid a financial crisis when the government hits its debt ceiling on June 1st and can no longer pay its bills. Everybody in this meeting reiterated the positions they were at. I didn't see any new movement. The president said the staff should get back together. Both sides stuck to their original bargaining positions, with Biden demanding that Congress raise the debt ceiling unconditionally, and McCarthy insisting that such a move be accompanied by big spending cuts.

Speaking to reporters afterward, McCarthy expressed frustration with the president. Well, I asked him numerous times, are there some places we could find savings? He wouldn't give me any, so I'm hopeful that we'll be able to find him. And after a nearly three-month medical absence from the Senate that threatened to derail Democrats' agenda, Dianne Feinstein returned to Washington on Tuesday night. Her return will restore a Democratic majority to the Senate Judiciary Committee, where Democrats need her vote to confirm federal judges and conduct investigations into the ethics of Supreme Court justices. Feinstein had asked to be replaced on the committee by a fellow Democrat,

but Republicans blocked the move, making her return increasingly urgent. Today's episode was produced by Stella Tan, Alex Stern, and Claire Tennesgetter. It was edited by Lexi Diao and Lisa Chow, contains original music by Alisha Ba'itub, Dan Powell, and Marion Lozano, and was engineered by Chris Wood. Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landvark of Wonderly. Special thanks to Lola Fadulu and Kate Christobek. That's it for The Daily. I'm Michael Barbaro. See you tomorrow.