The ongoing tension between Donald Trump and Canada took an unexpected turn when Ontario Premier Doug Ford suggested a counteroffer to Trump's remarks about
No. He was found liable for sexual abuse in a civil trial. Convictions are criminal and the standard of evidence is higher.
Basically the courts have decided that it’s slightly more likely than not that he sexually abused Carroll, which is all that’s needed to win a civil case. Criminal cases are on a “beyond a reasonable doubt” threshold which is much harder to meet.
Frankly, he probably wouldn’t be criminally convicted because of the higher standard - the defense in a criminal trial doesn’t have to prove the accused didn’t do it, they don’t even have to prove it’s more likely than not they didn’t do it, they only need to prove there’s a reasonable doubt that they might not have done it. And I think there’s just enough wiggle room around it he could possibly skate by.
On one hand, that’s how a criminal standard of justice should work, to prevent wrongfully convicting the innocent.
On the other hand, that would require the system to be functional and fair in the first place, rather than being slanted towards who can afford the better lawyers, but that’s a whole can of worms I don’t think I need to crack open here - we all agree on that anyway.
Aligations? Isn’t he convicted?
No. He was found liable for sexual abuse in a civil trial. Convictions are criminal and the standard of evidence is higher.
Basically the courts have decided that it’s slightly more likely than not that he sexually abused Carroll, which is all that’s needed to win a civil case. Criminal cases are on a “beyond a reasonable doubt” threshold which is much harder to meet.
Frankly, he probably wouldn’t be criminally convicted because of the higher standard - the defense in a criminal trial doesn’t have to prove the accused didn’t do it, they don’t even have to prove it’s more likely than not they didn’t do it, they only need to prove there’s a reasonable doubt that they might not have done it. And I think there’s just enough wiggle room around it he could possibly skate by.
On one hand, that’s how a criminal standard of justice should work, to prevent wrongfully convicting the innocent.
On the other hand, that would require the system to be functional and fair in the first place, rather than being slanted towards who can afford the better lawyers, but that’s a whole can of worms I don’t think I need to crack open here - we all agree on that anyway.