Alan Dershowitz Explains How Carroll Verdict Is Simultaneously A Big Win For Trump And Also A Travesty Of Justice

alan dershowitz

(Photo by John Lamparski/Getty Images for Hulu)

On Tuesday, retired law professor Alan Dershowitz went and blessed the people with his opinion on the E. Jean Carroll verdict finding Trump liable for sexual battery and defamation to the tune of $5 million.

If you’re jonesing for 45 minutes of Dersh explaining why shielding the jurors’ names is reversible error, have at it. But if you want a short, lively bump of crazy, you can get the good stuff on WABC Radio’s “Minicast,” which promises to get you up to speed in “10 Minutes Or Less.”

Astute observers will note that this podcast is 14 minutes and 35 seconds. But Alan Dershowitz cannot be constrained by mere space and time. And it’s not like anyone was going to cut off the host John Catsimatidis, the billionaire who bought WABC in 2019.

Catsimatidis kicked off the interview by suggesting that Trump hadn’t lost, or perhaps would have won if he hadn’t disparaged Carroll in such vulgar terms: “If he wouldn’ta said, ‘I didn’t do anything to the girl, I never saw her, I don’t know what she looks like’ — that the jury was possibly mad that he said ‘Why would I screw something like that, or something?’”

Dershowitz responded that the jury did find Trump “liable on kinda molesting her,” but described it as a “Rorschach verdict” which each side will claim as a victory. Like many of Trump’s allies, Dershowitz prefers to focus on the jury’s “no” verdict on the topline rape question, insisting that it means the panel believed Carroll was lying. In fact, her testimony was hazier as to whether he had managed to achieve intercourse, but highly specific on the digital penetration, AKA the “kinda molesting.”

But having assured the audience that the jury has now branded Carroll a liar, the professor went on to say that the defamation must be off the table because Trump was telling the truth. Ipso facto propter hoc!

“If his name wasn’t Donald Trump, it’d be reversed on appeal for lots of grounds,” he predicted confidently. “Number one: statute of limitations. You can’t just extend the statute of limitations after it’s expired.”

This is an argument about the newly enacted New York Adult Survivors Act which came into effect on Thanksgiving and gave adult victims of sexual assault a one-year period in which to bring civil suits against their abusers. Trump challenged the constitutionality of the law and lost, and in fact, the constitutionality of the Child Victims Act has been upheld in court, so apparently you can “just extend the statute of limitations” if you are the New York legislature.

Dersh is big mad that the lawyers didn’t get to know the identities of the jurors — although he fails to mention the time that his pal Donald unleashed a mob on one of the Roger Stone jurors, accusing her of voodoo magicking a guilty verdict. (See also: Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss.)

He went on to insist that it was reversible error for Judge Lewis Kaplan to admit the “Access Hollywood” tape and the testimony of other women who said Trump had assaulted them in just the same fashion, because apparently the professor never heard of Rule 412 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. The professor also wildly mischaracterized the jury instructions, claiming that the judge said, “If you believe Donald Trump touched her and put his fingers in inappropriate places, that is rape.”

That did not happen.

But soon enough, Dersh was back to his main topic: Poor Alan Dershowitz who never gets invited to brunch now. UNFAIR!

“Look how people treated me when I just defended him as I have an obligation to do under the Constitution against an unconstitutional impeachment. They just tried to destroy my life, my children’s lives, my wife’s life,” he complained, his voice cracking a bit. “So how do you expect judges and jurors to be objective when it comes to Donald Trump in a city like New York?”

Luckily, Alan Dershowitz has a book to explain it all. It’s called “Get Trump,” and you should buy it, says Alan Dershowitz.

But even a broken clock is right twice a day. And apparently that extra 4:35 seconds allowed Dersh to get it in during the show.

“It will not affect his political standing among Republicans,” he predicted confidently. And judging by the reception Trump received last night at CNN’s Republican town hall, he’s 100 percent correct.

Liz Dye lives in Baltimore where she writes about law and politics and appears on the Opening Arguments podcast.


(Visited 1 times, 1 visits today)