Legal experts skewered Alina Habba’s “comedy of bumbling errors” in Trump defamation trial

Former President Donald Trump’s appeal of the $83.3 million verdict in the defamation case brought by E. Jean Carroll is unlikely to succeed, legal experts say.

“Let me ruin the suspense for everyone. Trump doesn’t have an appeal,” Nashville lawyer Brian Manookian argued Friday. “I know the talking heads on TV who have never tried a case or appealed a jury verdict have to mention it. Here’s why it isn’t going to fly.”

A person must “preserve a reversible error at the trial level” in order to have a case with merit on appeal, Manookian explained, ultimately blaming Trump’s lack thereof on his legal team in the case.

“This is why you hire competent counsel. You need someone who actually knows the rules of evidence and procedure,” he said. “Alina Habba had no clue what was occurring throughout the trial. She not only failed to preserve any remote grounds for appeal, like a moron, she repeatedly and unintentionally waived them over and over.”

  • grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    77
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Stop absolving the media. They absolutely have some culpability here for treating whackjobs with the same credulity they treat scientists, treating existential threats against democracy as if they’re a normal part of the political horse race, and otherwise perpetuating habitual and systemic balance fallacies on a massive scale. The “MAGoos” didn’t just go off the deep end on their own; the media helped mislead them straight off it.

    • EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      10 months ago

      The other poster actually gave examples. You posted something but vague references to a “balance fallacy” (I love how you cited that, but not any examples. lol) . .and have a way better upvote to downvote ration than the other poster.

      This is the perfect example of this place using the upvote as the “I agree” button rather than actual, good arguments that add to the discussion. People want to shit on the media, and you gave them an a vague, effectively unchallengeable post to do so. Congrats.

    • PilferJynx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      I thought the American media has no obligation to the American people and it’s reporting, however flawed, is protected under the first amendment.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago
        1. I never said they didn’t.

        2. I equally have a first amendment right to removed about how irresponsible they’re being.

        • PilferJynx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Sure, but you’re trying to give them a responsibility they don’t have or care to have. Your truth to power doesn’t amount to much. And I agree, that’s a huge problem.