Comments by "GH1618" (@GH-oi2jf) on "Trump found liable of battery, defamation in E. Jean Carroll case" video.

  1. There was more to his statements than mere denial. Trump always says much more than he ought to, which is why the defamation charge stuck.
    3
  2. Testimony is evidence. Juries are the tryers of fact.
    3
  3. He isn’t as wealthy as he claims to be.
    2
  4. She brought the suit shortly after New York State lifted the statute of limitations for such suits. It was a temporary measure. There was a one-year window to bring civil suits for old cases of this type.
    2
  5. He could have testified. In his absence, the jury may decide the case without his testimony.
    2
  6. The judgment is the main thing.
    2
  7. Testimony is evidence. There were also supporting witnesses. The jury has the right to decide who to believe.
    2
  8. It was a civil trial.
    1
  9. She only had to convince the jurors, not you.
    1
  10. You don’t know what hearsay is. Her testimony and Trump’s deposition are direct evidence.
    1
  11. Testimony is evidence.
    1
  12. Testimony is evidence. Her testimony and that of her witnesses, and Trump’s deposition.
    1
  13. Her testimony and Trump’s deposition, mainly.
    1
  14.  @jolaharvel7852  — Her testimony is evidence. His deposition is also evidence.
    1
  15. Calling someone “ugly” is not defamation. There were other statements which were defamatory.
    1
  16. Trump is the one in deep carp. He is swamped with legal problems.
    1
  17. If there were no evidence, the judge would have dismissed the case. The jurors decide the worth of the evidence presented in court.
    1
  18. Biden had nothing to do with the lifting of the statute of limitations in New York State.
    1
  19. So-called “lie detectors” tests are not admissable evidence.
    1
  20. Testimony is evidence. It wasn’t hearsay. I don’t think you know what that means.
    1
  21. “Civil battery occurs when an individual is touched in an offensive manner. Battery could refer to an allegation that the defendant attacked the plaintiff (punching, kicking, choking, etc.) and caused physical harm, or that the defendant engaged in other non-consensual physical touching that did not cause physical injury.” (from Dupée and Monroe PC. Attorneys)
    1