Trump has child rape charges filed against him

I thought that two similar thread topics in different forums was allowed? What gives?

originally posted by: introvert
One interesting aspect in this case is that one of the witnesses, named "Tiffany Doe", was an employee of Epstein's.

That alone should eliminate her as a witness. conflict of interest. Hostile witness.

originally posted by: GreenGunther
There have been a couple of new articles relating to this, and to me it would seem the claims are true.. The huffington post did a decent one, but you can clearly see which side they are on, so bias could be involved.

Although it is written by a lawyer who deals with these things... "as a lawyer who represents women in sexual abuse cases every day" - www.huffingtonpost.com...

So give it a read.

And as to timing, well perhaps the victim has truly been scared off by Trumps alleged threats up until now, when she realised he might become the next president, she felt it was her duty to speak up. She also has a witness corroborating her claim, as well as the claims lining up nicely with Epsteins history and Trumps own words...

Things don't look good...

teh witness is a former employee of epstein. conflict on interest much?

Ya know what? This tells me the Clinton camp is scared!! After the scathing characterization that Comey gave Clinton yesterday they are in "throw something on the wall and hope it sticks", mode!

I don't believe this garbage for one second! Sorry but i don't!

Pax

This allegation is serious.

A suit has been filed and dismissed in California for procedural reasons and now refiled in a federal court in New York. There is a witness prepared to testify.

lawnewz.com...

In Jane Doe v. Donald Trump, a witness statement is attached to the Complaint, saying (among other disturbing things), “I personally witnessed the Plaintiff being forced to perform various sexual acts with Mr. Trump and Mr. Epstein. Both Mr. Trump and Mr. Epstein were advised that she was 13 years old.” And that’s not even all of it. “Tiffany Doe” went on to certify, “I personally witnessed four sexual encounters that the Plaintiff was forced to have with Mr. Trump during this period, including the fourth of these encounters where Mr. Trump forcibly raped her despite her pleas to stop.”

The context in which the sexual assaults are alleged to have occurred is parties given by Jeffrey Epstein, the billionaire hedge fund manager, acknowledged acquaintance of Donald Trump and registered sex offender.

en.wikipedia.org...

In June 2008, after pleading guilty to a single state charge of soliciting prostitution from girls as young as 14,[26] Epstein began serving an 18-month sentence. He served 13 months, and upon release became a registered sex offender.[3][27]

Donald Trump is known to have been an acquaintance of Jeffrey Epstein:

nymag.com...

Epstein likes to tell people that he's a loner, a man who's never touched alcohol or drugs, and one whose nightlife is far from energetic. And yet if you talk to Donald Trump, a different Epstein emerges. "I've known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy,'' Trump booms from a speakerphone. "He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it -- Jeffrey enjoys his social life."

www.hngn.com...

Trump and American financier Jeffrey Epstein, who is a registered sex offender, have been sued for "rape, sexual misconduct, criminal sexual acts, sexual abuse, forcible touching, assault, battery, intentional and reckless infliction of emotional distress, duress, and false imprisonment," according to the lawsuit.

The unnamed girl is in her 30s now, but she says the offenders knew she was an underage girl at the time. At many parties organised by Epstein at Manhattan in 1994, the men seemed to have promised her as well as other minor girls money and modelling careers to attend the parties. She charges Trump of initiating sexual contact with her on four occasions.

The incident recounted sounds quite distressing. During the last incident, "Trump tied the girl to a bed, exposed himself to her, and then proceeded to rape her. When the girl pleaded with Trump to stop, the presidential candidate allegedly responded to her pleas by violently striking her in the face with his open hand, screaming at her that he would do whatever he wanted."

Following the rape, he threatened that she should never reveal it, or she and her family would be harmed.

It'll be interesting to see if this case goes forward. Filing a suit like this is not done lightly. The consequences of failing to make the case stick could be costly.

I have to say that I can't imagine Donald Trump slapping a thirteen year old girl around in the course of a sexual encounter, but the rest of the story is very believable. Trump is a known "bon vivant" and a fifteen year acquaintance of Epstein's. The idea that Trump didn't know what was going on at Epstein's parties is not believable, but it is not proof that Trump participated in anything illegal.

In order to be believed I think the witness, "Tiffany Doe", would have to relate substantial amounts of detail connecting Donald Trump to the alleged incidents.

In the end it might not matter politically since this is the year of the "questionable" candidates. Trump's supporters are very loyal to him and might vote for him in spite of a conviction, expecting him to run the administration from a jail cell. That's the world we live in now.

a reply to: ipsedixit

Should it be investigated? Absolutely.

However I am curious as to why it has taken her so long to get to this point. She failed to act when the supposed actions occurred by not contacting law enforcement. Because of how much time has passed the statute of limitations applies to any criminal charges leaving only civil action.

The following is interesting, but may or may not be relevant to the allegations against Donald Trump. It could simply be coincidence.

Donald Trump's attraction to his daughter is something that he has been very open about. Despite that, I doubt if he has ever done anything improper to her. Her body language in these clips seems normal to me, a little uncomfortable, perhaps, but not really stressed.



Be that as it may, here are some interesting quotes from Donald Trump:

www.politico.com...

30. “You know who’s one of the great beauties of the world, according to everybody? And I helped create her. Ivanka. My daughter, Ivanka. She’s 6 feet tall, she’s got the best body. She made a lot money as a model—a tremendous amount.” (The Howard Stern Show, 2003)

31. “Every guy in the country wants to go out with my daughter.” (New York magazine, Dec. 13, 2004)

32. “… she does have a very nice figure. I’ve said if Ivanka weren’t my daughter, perhaps I’d be dating her.” (ABC’s “The View,” March 6, 2006)

33. “I’ve known Paris Hilton from the time she’s 12. Her parents are friends of mine, and, you know, the first time I saw her, she walked into the room and I said, ‘Who the hell is that?’ … Well, at 12, I wasn’t interested. I’ve never been into that. They’re sort of always stuck around that 25 category.” (The Howard Stern Show, 2003)

. . . .

36. Women: “You have to treat ’em like shxx.” (New York magazine, Nov. 9, 1992)

On a whim, I thought I would find out how old Ivanka Trump was in 1994, when it is alleged that her father raped a thirteen year old girl.

She was thirteen. According to Wikipedia, she was born in 1981.

en.wikipedia.org...

Here's another, probably completely irrelevant clip, from Chinatown:

originally posted by: Xcathdra

However I am curious as to why it has taken her so long to get to this point. She failed to act when the supposed actions occurred by not contacting law enforcement.

This comes up over and over in cases of alleged sexual assault. Trauma. Fear. The alleged victim in this case was just thirteen when it happened and alleges that she was threatened in order to keep silent about what happened.

Because of how much time has passed the statute of limitations applies to any criminal charges leaving only civil action.

I think even the statute for civil action has passed, but this can be set aside in certain circumstances. At this point we don't know if this case will be allowed to proceed.

a reply to: BrokedownChevy

Coming from a psychological point of view, many extremely rich people have strange, gross and sometimes illegal sexual fantasies. Normal sex is boring. They think they are entitled bc of their money. This does not surprise me

as i have no dog in this farce - lets examine instead the MMO [ from the plaintiffs angle ]

MMO is of course : MEANS , MOTIVE , OPPORTUNITY

in short how is the plaintiff doing this [ who is paying for legal filings etc ]

why is she doing this :

and lastly - why now ?

all of course rhetorical questions - i dont expect answers - but will read any - just for ammusement

i am loathe to question the motives of a person making such a serious accusation - but given the backstory to this tail and the time eleapse - the stench of external influence makes me abandon any quams

So, all this time he has been worth all this money no one came forward? No one tried to blackmail or bribe?

a reply to: ipsedixit

You just gonna ignore the witness is a former employee of epstein right? That alone should dismiss her as a witness with prejudice.

Also I found out a felon CAN be president. Criminals can in effect run their administration from jail.

Besides this isnt a criminal case btw. its only out for money.

a reply to: ipsedixit
I can almost smell the desperation from you all to get something to stick to this man.
He has survived the attempted character assassination of the left for about a year now and has brushed it off like a boss.
If this were true it would have been brought up years ago trauma or no trauma...

Not even sure why you Canadians have such an interest with Trump and American politics.
I'm actually rather upset with your parliament chanting "Four more years" to Obama.

Absolutely disgusting!
Could they bury their heads any further up his rear?
But I digress...

originally posted by: yuppa

You just gonna ignore the witness is a former employee of epstein right? That alone should dismiss her as a witness with prejudice.

The document filed with the court is at the following address:

www.scribd.com...

Both Epstein and Trump are listed in the claim. The witness would be testifying against her former employer. That's not an unusual event in the courts.

Also I found out a felon CAN be president. Criminals can in effect run their administration from jail.

Besides this isnt a criminal case btw. its only out for money.

Thanks for the correction. You're right, of course. It's a civil suit. If it were criminal and Trump were to be convicted in a convincing manner, I think many Trump supporters would continue to back him.

originally posted by: JAY1980
I can almost smell the desperation from you all to get something to stick to this man.

A lot of things stick to him. There is no problem getting things to stick to him. This is just something new.

He has survived the attempted character assassination of the left for about a year now and has brushed it off like a boss.

I don't think he has survived it myself. The divisions within the Republican Party are proof of that. He carries on, though. You are right about that.

If this were true it would have been brought up years ago trauma or no trauma...

No, not necessarily. There are numerous cases of such delays involved in reporting this sort of crime.

Not even sure why you Canadians have such an interest with Trump and American politics.

Canadian interests are quite tied to American government policies. Nowadays the citizens of any given country in the world could have a legitimate interest in the politics of the United States. American policies are felt worldwide.

I'm actually rather upset with your parliament chanting "Four more years" to Obama.
Absolutely disgusting!
Could they bury their heads any further up his rear?

They were just trying to be nice to a foreign dignitary. They do know that his final term is coming to an end. Most of the time Canadians are fine with Americans. Don't knock it. It's a good thing.

A lot of things stick to him. There is no problem getting things to stick to him. This is just something new.

It's not new. It stems from the original allegation in 1996. (which was dismissed).

A suit has been filed and dismissed in California for procedural reasons and now refiled in a federal court in New York. There is a witness prepared to testify.

It was dismissed in 1996, because the person filing it basically didn't exist. Clearly points to political posturing. Example, they investigated the address of the filer, and it was a long condemned house.

It was only refiled recently (during this election), so this should raise some additional red flags. As for a witness, still unnamed, so that remains to be seen, but of course, wouldn't put it past someone to try it. Thing is, the statute of limitations has expired, so really the claimant actually filed just to override that limit. Remains to be seen if it will be granted. Given the previous filing, likely not.

This reeks of fabricated BS.

And if done by Clinton, is especially stupid, as Billy is a pretty frequent guest of Orgy Island, Eppstein's little pedo island, so it probably isn't a good idea for her to dip too deep in that inkwell.....

You just gonna ignore the witness is a former employee of epstein right? That alone should dismiss her as a witness with prejudice

One may argue, just how is a 13 yr old wandering the docks, and then goes to a party at the invite of a hooker who promises modeling work? Just who is minding this kid? That's right, actually READ the case and circumstances. It simply doesn't add up at all. Sounds like total BS.

a reply to: Gazrok

I see what you are saying and there is a lot of sense to it. The fact remains that some lawyer drafted this complaint and if it is completely without merit, wouldn't there be a danger of blowback from Donald Trump? I was reading some article about this case in which it was speculated that Trump might go after the lawyer involved in this. I'm not knowledgeable enough to have an idea how that would be managed.

The bottom line here is whether a judge decides that there is enough merit in the case to proceed. One would hope that that is out of everyone's hands but the judge involved.

If the case goes to trial, the witnesses will have to be able to connect Mr. Trump to the alleged events in a convincing way.

Of course, as you suggest, this whole thing could be a dog and pony show designed simply to throw mud in Donald Trump's direction and hope that some of it sticks, even if the case is tossed out immediately.

That might be what is happening, but as you yourself point out, this has come up before. It's not new. There is another sexual harassment case that was settled out of court, as well. I saw one magazine article on the Atlantic Monthly website that said that Mr. Trump has had 196 lawsuits filed against him, mostly dealing with his business practices, many involving instances where he has not paid amounts owed.

Yet, politically, he is where he is, seeking the presidency.

It'll be interesting to see what the court does with this claim.

a reply to: ipsedixit

it could be seen as bad employee wanting vengeance on her employer. This womans easy to destroy just take apage from the clinton play book. Unless theres soem physical evidence i dont believe her.

a reply to: BrokedownChevy

The USA is showing the world what happens if the government is completely taken over by corruption. One candidate is worse than the other as a human being..

But does it really matter... what power does a potus have these days?

a reply to: yuppa

I think you are being perfectly reasonable. If the judge thinks that the case ought to be heard, then the witnesses will have to convince a jury by a "preponderance of the evidence". That is the usual standard in civil cases, not the standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt". The civil standard is less demanding. One could find for the complainant even while having some doubt about the story, if the preponderance of the evidence tends to support it.

This would lead to some sort of financial award. My understanding is that Jeffrey Epstein, Mr. Trump's fellow respondent in the matter, has already settled a number of such similar claims.

This brings up the subject of "similar fact" evidence. I don't know if similar fact evidence could become part of this case. It was ruled out of the Ghomeshi case (see my threads on the subject) in Toronto because of indications of possible collusion between witnesses, but in this case, in the US courts, I don't know what the general rules are on similar fact.