E Jean Carroll pushes back in Trump cross-examination: ‘He raped me whether I screamed or not’

 

E Jean Carroll pushes back in Trump cross-examination: ‘He raped me whether I screamed or not’

 

The advice columnist denied that politics or book sales motivated her to make the accusation against Donald Trump

 

Chris McGreal in New York

Thu 27 Apr 2023 19.19 BST

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/apr/27/e-jean-carroll-trump-rape-trial-cross-examination

 

The advice columnist E Jean Carroll has denied that she falsely accused Donald Trump of raping her in order to sell books and for political ends.

 

On the third day of Carroll’s civil suit against the former president for battery and defamation, Trump’s lawyer, Joe Tacopina, put it to her that she made her allegation the centrepiece of a book proposal she was trying to sell.

 

Carroll is seeking damages for the alleged rape in a New York department store changing room in the mid-1990s and for defamation after Trump accused her of lying when she went public with her accusations in the book.

 

Carroll, who spent most of the day under cross-examination, said she was motivated to speak up after the New York Times’ exposure of Harvey Weinstein’s crimes prompted women across the US to relate their own experiences of sexual assault and fired the #MeToo movement.

 

But she did acknowledge that she decided to sue Trump for defamation following a conversation at a party with George Conway, then the husband of one of Trump’s top White House aides, Kellyanne Conway, but also a prominent Trump critic.

 

“George Conway does not like Donald Trump,” said Carroll, without elaboration.

 

Asked why she did not speak up when Trump was running for president in 2016, Carroll said it did not occur to her.

 

“I was never going to talk about what Donald Trump did,” she said. “Never.”

 

Tacopina sought to discredit Carroll’s account by dwelling on why she didn’t scream during the alleged attack, and why she admits laughing about it immediately afterwards.

 

Carroll stuck by her account that she went into the dressing room with Trump because she thought she was playing out a joke by telling him to put on the lingerie that he had been urging her to wear.

 

“If a man tells me to try on some lingerie, I tell him to go try it on,” she said. “I had no concept of how this would turn out. I thought this funny conversation would continue.”

 

Carroll said that when Trump suddenly attacked her in the changing room, she instinctively laughed.

 

“Laughter is a very good weapon to calm a man down if he has any erotic intention,” she said.

 

Tacopina then pressed Carroll repeatedly about why she didn’t scream.

 

“I was in too much of a panic to scream,” she responded. “You can’t beat up on me for not screaming.”

 

Carroll said that women who report rape are frequently asked why they didn’t scream, which was one of the reasons they do not go to the police.

 

Tacopina continued to press the issue, including what he said were differing accounts Carroll had given over the years for not screaming including that she “isn’t a screamer”, that she didn’t want to make a scene and that she was too full of adrenaline.

 

Carroll said all of those things could have been at play, and in any case it did not matter.

 

“I’m telling you he raped me whether I screamed or not,” she said, her voice breaking.

 

Tacopina also confronted Carroll over the fact she did not call police and instead called a friend, Lisa Birnbach.

 

Trump’s lawyer pressed Carroll about why, by her own account, she was laughing as she spoke to Birnbach. Carroll said that she was looking for reassurance that what she had just gone through was not as bad as she feared.

 

As Carroll began describing the assault, Birnbach told her to stop laughing.

 

“If Lisa had laughed I would have felt so much better. I was disoriented,” she said.

 

Instead, Birnbach told Carroll: “He raped you.”

 

“Those are the words that brought the reality to the forefront of my mind,” said Carroll.

 

Later, another friend told her not to go to the police because Trump was too powerful to take on.

 

“That’s the advice I wanted so that’s the advice I followed,” said Carroll.

 

She said it was not odd to avoid going to the police. “Many women do not go to the police. I understand why,” she said.

 

Tacopina put it to Carroll that her view of Trump was of a “brutal, dangerous man”.

 

“Yes, he is,” she replied without hesitation.

 

Tacopina also confronted Carroll with a part of the draft of her book written a couple of years into his presidency that was not included in the final version, but which appeared to indicate a political motive for her going public with her accusations.

 

“But now after two years of watching the man in action, I became persuaded that he wants to kill me. He’s poisoning my water. He’s polluting my air. And as he stacks the courts, my rights over my body are being taken away state by state. So, now I will tell you what happened,” she wrote.

 

Tacopina also focused on an email sent by Carol Martin, a key witness in the trial who Carroll said she told about the alleged rape shortly after the attack.

 

In September 2017, Martin sent an email critical of Trump: “This has to stop. As soon as we’re both well enuf [sic] to scheme, we must do our patriotic duty again.”

 

Carroll replied: “TOTALLY!!! I have something special for you when we meet.”

 

Asked what that something special was, Carroll said she had no idea but added that the two women often bought “funny gifts” for each other.

 

Tacopina put it to Carroll that she started the book only two weeks after the email exchange. Carroll said that was not true.

 

Tacopina also latched on to a chapter in Carroll’s book – entitled What Do We Need Men For? A Modest Proposal – in which the author advocates for all men to be shipped to Montana “for retraining”.

 

Trump’s lawyer appeared to be suggesting this was evidence of an anti-male bent when the judge, Lewis Kaplan, waded in to tell him it was satire modeled on A Modest Proposal, the renowned Jonathan Swift satirical essay from 1729 which suggested that impoverished Irish people should sell their children as food to the rich.

 

“Move on,” said the judge.

 

Trump is not expected to testify. But he has claimed the encounter never happened, that he does not know Carroll and she is not his “type”. On Wednesday, he called the case “a made-up scam” and Carroll’s lawyer a political operative, an outburst that drew a warning.

 

Carroll told the court about online abuse she received after accusing Trump and again when he posted messages on social media denying the accusations and accusing her of being a liar.

 

The jury was shown some of the messages, which included misogynistic epithets and other personal attacks.

 

Asked if she regretted the lawsuit, Carroll said: “About five times a day. It doesn’t feel pleasant to be under threat.”

 

The trial resumes on Monday with Tacopina continuing his cross-examination of Carroll.

 

The Associated Press contributed reporting