No, he’s a rapist, adjudicated just means a judge determined it. It’s the same as convicted. You don’t call a convicted murder an “adjudicated murderer,” he’s a convicted murderer.
Trump is a Rapist, plain & simple. He’s also a Traitor, racist, misogynist, white supremacist, ignorant, incompetent, profoundly psychotic, and irredeemably and enthusiastically corrupt.
It also doesn’t stop the judge from assigning payment of both parties legal fees to the losing side. A common practice for those kinds of friviolous cases.
Getting legal fees paid isn’t always possible, and is very different in various jurisdictions.
I was once sued in revenge by a supplier I’d dropped. We knew I’d win the case (they were hoping I’d settle), but I was pissed about how much it would cost me, even if I won.
It turned out that we had to motion for legal fees by a certain date. So my lawyer waited until about an hour before the courthouse closed on that day, and filed the motion without giving them a chance to react reciprocally. So they’d have to pay my legal fees, but I wouldn’t have to pay theirs.
They lost badly, as predicted, and paid my lawyer for their hubris. No compensation for two years of worry and lost sleep, though.
Sure, but it’s less about the money than it is about the act itself, the ultra wealthy can just throw money at lawyers to waste other people’s time, and wear them down, despite whatever outcome they still get what they want really
The proper thing to say would be ‘adjudicated rapist’
No, he’s a rapist, adjudicated just means a judge determined it. It’s the same as convicted. You don’t call a convicted murder an “adjudicated murderer,” he’s a convicted murderer.
Trump is a Rapist, plain & simple. He’s also a Traitor, racist, misogynist, white supremacist, ignorant, incompetent, profoundly psychotic, and irredeemably and enthusiastically corrupt.
Put whatever qualifiers you want on it. A rapist is a rapist. It’s a factual statement and, therefore, is not slander or libelous.
Doesn’t stop them from filling lawsuits, no matter how frivolous
It also doesn’t stop the judge from assigning payment of both parties legal fees to the losing side. A common practice for those kinds of friviolous cases.
Getting legal fees paid isn’t always possible, and is very different in various jurisdictions.
I was once sued in revenge by a supplier I’d dropped. We knew I’d win the case (they were hoping I’d settle), but I was pissed about how much it would cost me, even if I won.
It turned out that we had to motion for legal fees by a certain date. So my lawyer waited until about an hour before the courthouse closed on that day, and filed the motion without giving them a chance to react reciprocally. So they’d have to pay my legal fees, but I wouldn’t have to pay theirs.
They lost badly, as predicted, and paid my lawyer for their hubris. No compensation for two years of worry and lost sleep, though.
Sure, but it’s less about the money than it is about the act itself, the ultra wealthy can just throw money at lawyers to waste other people’s time, and wear them down, despite whatever outcome they still get what they want really