Day 3 Inner City Press: (EJC Cross x by Habba resumes)
ThreadReader is still slow and running behind the actual Xitter thread a few minutes.
They're back.
Judge Kaplan: The objection is sustained. It's remote in time and of dubious value - and prejudicial.
Habba: How about DX 44? What is this?
Carroll: A tweet.
Habba: I move to admit
Carroll's lawyer: Objection
Judge Kaplan: Sustained
Habba: You wrote, How do you know if your sexual advance is unwanted until you actually advance it - is this still up?
Carroll: Yes.
Habba: This says, Show the man what you like or he will regret he even HAS a pen*s - isn't this like --
Objection. Sustained
Habba: What does this mean, What can be done about the pen*s?
Carroll: It's a philosophical question.
Habba: Discussing pen*ses?
Carroll: Yes, we discussed pen*ses.
Habba: DX 88.
Carroll's lawyer; Objection. This is 2010.
Judge Kaplan: Sustained
Day 3 Inner City Press: (EJC Cross x by Habba cont'd)
Habba: Did the verdict in the case last year provide you with greater status in New York?
Carroll: A feeling of triumph.
Habba: You did media?
Carroll: We had five TV appearances. I posted twice on my Substack about it. And on Twitter. And Instagram.
Habba: Did you speak with reporters?
Carroll: At my lawyer's office. With the NY Times, a group of NYT reporters.
Habba: And press since then?
Carroll: I live a quiet life.
Habba: And you've been on left leaning platforms?
Carroll's lawyer: Objection
Judge Kaplan: Sustained.
Habba: They are left leaning?
Judge Kaplan: Did you not hear me?
Habba: You went on TV?
Carroll: To say we'd won this milestone case.
Habba: What is this?
Judge Kaplan: You are trying to get her to read it to you.
Habba: Is this your number of Twitter followers?
Carroll: I worked for it.
Habba: It helps your stories go out?
Carroll: Yes
Day 3 Inner City Press: (EJC Cross x by Habba concludes)
Habba: After the last trial, celebrities reached out to you - like John Cusack?
Carroll: I don't know.
Habba: And Ms. Sorvino?
Carroll: Yes, thanks for reminding me.
Habba: And Jamie Lee Curtis, and Rob Reiner, and Bette Midler?
Carroll: Yes, it was great.
Habba: And you've been invited to parties?
Carroll: Two, at Molly Jong-Fast's place.
Habba: Who does she write for?
Carroll: These days, Vanity Fair.
Habba: What is your handle on Instagram?
Carroll: I only go on twice a month or so.
Habba: Do you feel you are more recognized today than you were in June of 2019?
Carroll's lawyer: Objection
Judge Kaplan: Sustained.
Habba: You have been provided the opportunity of hosting your own Substack-
Carroll's lawyer: Objection and as to the tone
Carroll: I am in this trial to bring my old reputation back.
Habba: So you are suing Donald Trump to get your old reputation back?
Carroll: Yes.
Habba: No further questions.
Judge Kaplan: We'll take our break.
Book:
Thread will continue
Habba: And you've been on left leaning platforms?
Carroll's lawyer: Objection
Judge Kaplan: Sustained.
Habba: They are left leaning?
Judge Kaplan: Did you not hear me?
Kaplan is such a meanie.
Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore,
So do our minutes hasten to their end . . .
Habba: This person is called Power To the Polish [like, shoes]
Judge Kaplan: The person probably meant Polish [the country]
Like shoes . . ?
Bwahahahahahahahahaha!!
I'm sure he was saying how Habba pronounced it - and I bet the handle has a Polish (like the country) flag in it. LOL
I think her new nickname is Alina "objection sustained" Habba. And doodoohead wasn't even there for her to perform for.
I'll bet she does NOT do the cross for the damages expert.
Will the jury see the judge as bullying her or will they see her an an idiot that the judge has no patience for. It's hard to tell the tone from just text and he doesn't really describe demeanor of people in the room. I don't know how he does this - he'll sometimes do 2 trials at once. He did the SBF trial and the Carroll 2 trial as well as tons of others.
Do the right thing. It will gratify some people and astonish the rest. - Mark Twain
Habba was a little more under control today but she still lost on almost every objection. I don't think anyone mentioned but seems the Orange Menace was not there.
Reality Check wrote: ↑Thu Jan 18, 2024 11:09 am
Habba was a little more under control today but she still lost on almost every objection. I don't think anyone mentioned but seems the Orange Menace was not there.
Not there and "claiming" to be attending the funeral of his MIL. When just yesterday and last night he said he was going to attend every minute of the trial and that the judge prevented him from attending the funeral.
I'd bet we'll see that's not true, but... maybe he did.
They're back.
Judge Kaplan: Redirect.
Roberta Kaplan (RK): Very brief. Ms. Carroll, did Donald Trump have his office in the White House?
Habba: Objection!
Judge Kaplan: It's about where his office was.
Habba: I know what she'd trying to do
Judge Kaplan: Sidebar
They've back.
RK: Did any of the tweets before Donald Trump's statement call you a Democratic operative or say that you should be raped?
Carroll: No. Neither.
RK: Ms. Habba asked you about being on magazine covers. Did you reveal your account of what Mr. Trump did to be on covers?
Habba: Objection!
Judge Kaplan: Overruled
Carroll: No.
RK: Did you expect backlash?
Habba: Objection. Asked and answered.
Judge Kaplan: Overruled.
Carroll: Yes.
RK: Did what Donald Trump said make the backlash worse?
Carroll: Yes. It was worse.
RK: Plaintiff's 164.
Habba: Do you plan to play what he said?
RK: Yes. And I have a transcript. 164-T.
Habba: No objection your Honor.
Video played of Trump in front of flags on NewsMax saying "It's a rigged deal, I don't know her."
Habba: Play the whole clip
Habba: They cut the part about her.
Judge Kaplan: He said, whole thing is made up. That's not about her? We'll pass over this for now.
RK: No further questions.
Judge Kaplan: Re-cross?
Habba: I'll be brief. Was it your choice to do the article with the Cut?
Yes.
Habba: Did you delete those tweets?
Carroll: My heart was racing --
Habba: Please answer the question.
Carroll: I don't precisely remember deleting them.
Habba: Have you ever deleted threats?
Carroll: Yes.
Habba: On what platforms?
Carroll: Twitter... Facebook... [
RK: Objection.
Judge Kaplan. Sustained.
Habba: Pull up DX 72 for the witness.
RK: We have objections.
Judge Kaplan: I haven't seen it. Put it on my screen. Is there a question?
Habba: Do you recognize this? Is it your Twitter handle?
Carroll: Yes.
Habba: I'd like to move DX 72 into evidence.
RK: Objection.
Judge Kaplan: Sustained.
Habba: How about DX 74 -
Judge Kaplan: If you're going to do this on each - are there objections?
RK: We asked to meet and confer.
Habba: That is a misrepresentation.
Judge Kaplan: You are asking to re-open the direct.
Habba: No, I will look it up--
Judge Kaplan: You do that.
Habba: I would like to go one by one, there are only six
Judge Kaplan: You will not go one by one.
Habba: I preserved
Judge Kaplan: You think you did
Habba: Did you speak, after yesterday, with any attorneys, like George Conway?
Carroll: No.
Habba: No more questions.
Judge Kaplan: Ms. Carroll, you are excused.
Story later. Book:
Thread will continue
E. Jean Carroll is off the stand after a day and a half of testimony in the civil trial to decide how much money in damages, if any, former President Donald Trump must pay her for his 2019 defamatory statements about her sexual assault allegations.
Carroll faced re-direct questioning from her attorney Roberta Kaplan, followed by re-cross examination by Trump attorney Alina Habba.
Dr. Ashlee Humphreys, an expert on damages who testified at the first trial, is the next witness called to the stand.
"Mickey Mouse and I grew up together." - Ruthie Tompson, Disney animation checker and scene planner and one of the first women to become a member of the International Photographers Union in 1952.
ICP Day 3 (Professor Ashlee Humphreys direct Cross X):
I think ICP missed the direct X.
OK - we are belatedly back - E Jean Carroll's damages expert Prof Ashlee Humphreys of Northwestern is on the stand with a word cloud on the screen.
Trump's lawyer Madaio: Prof Humphreys, can I show you this as a demonstrative -
Judge Kaplan: Are you offering it?
Madaio: I don't think it's been provided -
Judge Kaplan: Excuse me. Any objection?
Carroll's lawyer: No.
Judge Kaplan: You may display it.
[Graph of Carroll search volume after The Cut, then Trump statements 1 and 2.]
Madaio: Some is due to her accusation?
Humphreys: This chart is by day, not hours.
Madaio: So you in first report you said--
Judge Kaplan: So you're now reading from the report you don't want to put in, is that what we're doing?
Carroll's lawyer: Objection.
Madaio: Can I refresh your recollection?
Madaio: This is the interview with CNN New Day - you see that?
Humphreys: I see that.
Madaio: Now Anderson Cooper 360 -
Carroll's lawyer: Objection.
Judge Kaplan: Let's send the jury out for a few minutes, the Professor too
Northwestern University professor Ashlee Humphreys, who was called as a witness by E. Jean Carroll’s lawyers as an expert on damages, testified it could cost up to $12.1 million for Carroll to repair her reputation with those who likely believed Donald Trump.
Humphreys — who was contracted to analyze the reach of Donald Trump's statements and assess the damage to Carroll’s reputation — created a hypothetical reputation-repair campaign designed to change the minds of the nearly 25 million people that she estimates were likely to have been receptive to Trump's comments about Carroll.
Someone in that audience would need to see corrective messaging as many as seven times to change their minds, Humphreys testified. It could cost up to $12.1 million to implement a campaign that could change the "strongly held" attitudes of people who likely believe Trump.
Humphreys said her analysis found that damage of Trump's statements at issue in this case "was severe to her [Carroll’s] reputation as a journalist, and the costs to repair it are considerable."
Carroll’s attorney asked Humphreys a series of questions about a report she compiled for this case related to the reach of Trump’s 2019 statements denying Carroll’s allegations.
In total Humphrey's analysis estimates Trump's 2019 statements garnered somewhere between 85.8 million and 104.1 million impressions from social media, television, and online stories. The Northwestern University professor said that's probably a low estimate because she didn't factor in certain data sources like Facebook, Reddit, or local news outlets.
I think that during the break the ICP reporter tweeted portions of Prof. Humprheys' testimony from the first trial. It was confusing.
Judge Kaplan: So -
Habba: Your Honor the witness is still here.
Judge Kaplan: She was at the door when you stood up. What's your point, counsel?
Madaio: The spike in interest.
Judge Kaplan: Is it in the supplement report?
Carroll's lawyer: No
Judge Kaplan: What I do know is you folks submitted papers that said the follow as I remember, I make an error in this because I'm only human - you asked for a supplemental report eliminating the impact from the AC360 program, agree so far?
Judge Kaplan: Then you got the supplemental report, eliminating AC360, and were told the witness would not offer any data on that, right?
Madaio: It was to remove President Trump's June 24 statement
Judge Kaplan: You claimed the data was still in
Madaio: Yes
Judge Kaplan: You're confused because there had been a renumbering in the supplemental report, right so far?
Madaio: Yes but--
Judge Kaplan: Work with me. I issued an order that there appeared to be confusion. Is that about right? So what are we talking about?
Madaio: We are trying it back to the chart, the spike on June 24. She claims it's due to the statement by President Trump but ignores Ms. Carroll's June 24 appearance.
Shawn Crowley: The expert said she was not attributing the Google traffic to that
Shawn Crowley: I don't want there to be a suggestion that the AC360 is in her report. But I want the rest excluded because it contains references to DNA and other topics that are out of bounds.
Madaio: I'd like to show Chart 11.
Crowley: That would be misleading
Judge Kaplan: I'll let you make the point you want to make, if you can make it. There's no reference to Anderson Cooper. Now we'll extend the break by 10 minutes so we get a break.
[Note: Humphreys points are in this:
Thread will continue
From :
Judge Kaplan: Next witness.
It's Prof Ashlee Humphreys. Q: What was your Ph.D. in? Humphreys: Cultural sociology and marketing.
Q: Are you being paid for this? A: Yes. $500 for preparation, $850 for testimony. Q: Per hour? A: Yes
Still from
Judge Kaplan: Bring in the jury.... Cross examination. Trump's lawyer: Professor Humphreys you were paid to study the impact of Mr. Trump's statements? Judge Kaplan: Can we avoid the obvious?
They're back.
Crowley: Dr. Humphreys lives in Chicago and has kids - can we stay past 4:30 to finish the cross?
Judge Kaplan: What about the jury? I think we can do this a lot more efficiently...
Jury entering!
Madaio: Let me show you Figure 12.
[A comment on a news article saying "E Jean Carroll is a crazy person.]
Madaio: Is this attributable to President Trump?
Humphreys: These mirror his language.
Madaio: Your Honor I'd like to ask about the next ones.
Judge Kaplan: I don't think it's going to happen.
Madaio: In your opinion is it uncommon for Twitter users to make negative comments when discussing polarizing topics?
Humphreys: What do you mean by uncommon?
Judge Kaplan: We are now wasting time, big time. We all agree that Lincoln was the 16th. Let's move on.
Madaio: Did you see any positive messages about Ms. Carroll?
Humphreys: Yes. But I did not count them in my damages report.
Madaio: So did you consider if they offset--
Judge Kaplan: Let me see counsel at sidebar....
Then: Madaio: What about these positive comments from Alyssa Milano?
Crowley: These are after the verdict in the first case, and not part of this case
Judge Kaplan: Get onto something relevant
Madaio: Did you consider if Ms. Carroll makes more money now?
Judge Kaplan: No. You can argue that in closing. This is a cross examination.
Madaio: I'll move on your Honor.
Madaio: Your estimate has a $10 million spread.
Humphreys: I don't think one time would be enough.
Madaio: Have you ever executed a reputation repair program?
Humphreys: Never.
Madaio: You have no real world experience?
Judge Kaplan: There was birth, adolescence
Judge Kaplan: Those are real world experiences.
Madaio: You are familiar with a reputation repair firm?
Humphreys: With one? Yes.
Madaio: How much can it cost?
Humphreys: I am aware of one costing $50 million... A hedge fund manager...
Madaio: In your program, you talk about social media influencers improving her reputation- do you think it would have that effect?
Humphreys: As part of a wider campaign.
Madaio: You said they could praise her books- would that change people thinking she's a liar?
Humphreys: Yes, over time, it impacts the view of the audience.
Madaio: Do you think her media appearance have helped?
Crowley: Objection. Outside the scope of her
Habba: I can't hear
Crowley: Outside the scope of her report
Madaio: You really think you could hire Joe Rogan and Candice Owens to do this?
Crowley: Yes, I believe they do it.
Madaio: Is your damages model account for real world harm?
Crowley: Objection
Judge Kaplan: Sustained
Madaio: Let's look at page 30 of your supplemental report
Humphreys: Could I have a paper copy?
Madaio: Yes.
Crowley: I understand he is going to ask about a TV appearance that was removed from the report
Madaio: Let's go to your initial report, T-1, AC360?
Madaio: You have the rating estimated at 877,000 - but your damages report at page 29 says 9.4 million
Crowley: This is comparing ratings to impressions
Madaio: Is there a difference?
Humphreys: There were some labeling issues
Humpheys: The larger number was ABC News with David Muir. It's that the labels do not correspond.
Madaio: Why not?
Humphreys: The overall results are the same, T1 or T46.
Madaio: Let's go back to the initial report at 105, T3, Cuomo Primetime, it's 936,000
Crowley: Professor Humphreys has testified-
Habba: Is that an objection? She's just talking.
Judge Kaplan: Ms. Habba, sit down please. Mr. Madaio will defend himself.
Madaio: I would like through examples, I think it's very relevant
Kudge Kaplan: Keep on walking
Judge Kaplan: Is the bottom line here that the numbering changed when you eliminated certain items from the original report?
Humphreys: I'm looking at the same rating information
Madaio: Did you review the supplemental report?
Humphreys: I didn't check the labels
Judge Kaplan: It was a labeling error, she's said it again and again. If you want to take everyone's time with this, go ahead.
Madaio: T37, First Look, it's 385,000 - but in the supplemental report, T37 says 1.4 million.
Humphreys: But that's really T33.
Madaio: Strike as non responsive
Judge Kaplan: Overruled. Let's see if we can't short circuit this. Turn to page 105, TV impressions model - it lists each show included in your original analysis, correct?
Humphreys: Correct.
Madaio: Your Honor I would like to continue my line of questioning.
Judge Kaplan: I'm sure you would. And you'll get your chance. Professor Humphreys, the supplemental report does not list each show, right?
Humphreys: Correct.
Madaio: Did you check these?
A: No
Madaio: You have a Twitter account - it was public until recently, right?
Humphreys: Correct.
Madaio: Why did you take it private?
Humphreys: I had a few high profile trials.
Madaio: Because you knew you might receive nasty messages.
Madaio: E. Jean Carroll could have made her account private, right?
Carroll's lawyer: Objection!
Madaio: No further questions.
Judge Kaplan: Re-direct?
Crowley: About the labeling
Habba: Objection, your honor, you did this
Judge Kaplan: Not your witness
Thanks VERY much for the verbatim play-by-play RealityCheck. In the portion of cross you quoted in post #876 Habba was trying to establish that Ms. Carroll enjoyed and welcomed sexual assault. At least that is what I think she was trying to do. An obnoxious strategy to be sure but do she and her client realize that the line of questioning assumes that sexual assault did in fact occur? Ms. Habba made herself look like a jerk in front of the jury all day long but she probably does not care that she is a laughingstock in the legal community forever.
The other day, tfg was spouting off to the judge who told him to behave or he'd throw him out, saying that's probably what he wants him to do. Of course trump wants to claim he was unfairly thrown out by the totally partisan judge.
But...I had a fantasy that if he yaks again and doesn't obey orders to pipe down, a judicious use of duct tape could come in handy. No throwing out of the courtroom but no more outbursts.
Do the right thing. It will gratify some people and astonish the rest. - Mark Twain
p0rtia wrote: ↑Thu Jan 18, 2024 5:28 pm
Thanks, RC!
You're welcome. Hope it is useful.
Useful and very fascinating. Thank you.
Edit: The 32 people who didn't pick the first option in the poll can always change their votes, that's one of the features of this particular poll (but not every poll has this, it's part of the poll setup).
Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.
X 4
X 32
