E. Jean Carroll leaves court on May 2, 2023. Photo / Anna Watts, The New York Times
E. Jean Carroll leaves court on May 2, 2023. Photo / Anna Watts, The New York Times
A lawyer defending former President Donald Trump against writer E. Jean Carroll’s lawsuit accusing him of rape said on Wednesday (Thursday NZT) that he would present no witnesses.
The lawyer, Joseph Tacopina, had earlier told the judge that Trump would not come to court to testify in the civil case.Trump, who is again running for president, travelled to Scotland this week to open a new golf course.
On Wednesday, speaking out of the jury’s presence, Tacopina told Judge Lewis A. Kaplan of US District Court in Manhattan that an expert witness the defence had hoped to call on Trump’s behalf was not available.
Even without witnesses, Trump’s lawyers can still use testimony they elicited during cross-examinations of Carroll and people who testified on her behalf when they make their closing argument to the jury.
Carroll’s lawyer, Roberta A. Kaplan, said she would likely finish presenting Carroll’s case by midday Thursday. Lewis Kaplan, who is not related to Roberta Kaplan, told the jury that it would likely receive the case for deliberation early next week.
Carroll has said the attack took place during a visit to luxury department store Bergdorf Goodman one evening in the mid-1990s. As she was leaving through a revolving door, Trump entered and recognised her, she testified, and persuaded her to help him shop for a gift for a female friend. She said Trump went on to rape her in a dressing room in the lingerie department.
Joseph Tacopina, a lawyer for former President Donald Trump, leaves the federal courthouse in Manhattan on April 27, 2023. Photo / Anna Watts, The New York Times
At Mar-a-Lago
Carroll’s lawyers promised in their opening statement to show the jury not only that Trump had assaulted her, but also that he had assaulted two other women “in a remarkably similar way”.
The jury heard from one, Jessica Leeds, on Tuesday. They are expected to hear from the other, Natasha Stoynoff, on Wednesday afternoon. Shawn G. Crowley, a lawyer for Carroll, said in her opening statement that the jury would hear Stoynoff’s account of travelling in December 2005 to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida to write a story for People magazine about his wedding anniversary.
“Mr Trump led Ms Stoynoff to an empty room, claiming that he wanted to show her something there,” Crowley said. “As soon as they got inside, Trump closed the door, grabbed Ms Stoynoff’s shoulders, pushed her against the wall and started kissing her.”
Stoynoff first told her story publicly in 2016.
In the courtroom
When Tacopina cross-examined Carroll earlier in the trial, he highlighted what he described as her unusual behaviour during the alleged attack and her inability to remember some key details afterwards. On Wednesday, Kaplan questioned Dr Leslie Lebowitz, a clinical psychologist who spent about 20 hours interviewing Carroll, in an attempt to put Carroll’s behaviour in the context of common responses to traumatic events.
Lebowitz testified that when a person’s brain is inundated with stress hormones, the prefrontal cortex — part of the brain associated with logic and reasoning — shuts down and a person may “do things that appear to be illogical and irrational”.
Kaplan also questioned Lebowitz about why Carroll refused to use the words “rape” or “victim”, and how she avoided men.
“She blamed herself for it — she felt like she was stupid in a way that was hard to shake,” Lebowitz said. But perhaps even more fundamentally than that, she said, “it made her feel like she was worth less than she had been before”.
Chad Seigel, one of Trump’s lawyers, asked Lebowitz whether it would be fair to say Carroll had presented her symptoms in a way that would benefit her case. “I don’t believe she did that,” Lebowitz said.
He asked whether Carroll had a “vested interest” in the case’s result.
“She certainly cares very much about the outcome of this case,” Lebowitz replied.
Sharp elbows
The direct examination of Lebowitz was the first time that the jury saw Kaplan, who is Carroll’s lead lawyer and a prominent player in liberal legal circles, in sustained action.
Kaplan appeared frustrated with Seigel’s cross-examination of Lebowitz. After Seigel cut off Lebowitz as she was responding to one of his questions, Kaplan stood and argued directly with him. The judge disapproved.
Kaplan objected to many of Seigel’s questions, contending they were “asked and answered” and “argumentative”. The judge sustained several of those objections.
The judge appeared irritated not only by the dynamic between the lawyers, but also by several lines of questioning. There is a “rule about how you are to do this, and this isn’t it”, Lewis Kaplan told Seigel at one point.
Lebowitz, for her part, didn’t appear to be fazed. At times, she looked directly at the jury as she testified. During one sidebar among the lawyers, she leaned on the witness stand and took in the courtroom, gazing at a purple-and-blue piece of yarn work behind the judge’s bench.
