Former President Donald Trump is currently in his second trial for defamation of writer E. Jean Carroll. In the first trial, which concluded in May 2023, a federal jury found Trump guilty of “sexually abusing” Carroll and defaming her when he denied her allegations. He was ordered to pay $5 million in damages. The current trial aims to determine if Trump should pay more for additional defamation and, if so, how much.
The judge in the case, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan, has had to address the conduct of both Trump and his chief lawyer, Alina Habba, in the courtroom. Trump has been speaking out loudly from the defense table, while Habba has disregarded general principles of practicing law. Judge Kaplan finds such behavior intolerable, especially when a defendant who is represented by counsel speaks directly to the judge and makes statements that the jury can hear.
The fact that one of the parties involved is an extremely prominent political candidate, in this case, Trump, doesn’t affect the judge’s mindset. Judge Kaplan treats Trump like any other difficult litigant and ensures that both Carroll and Trump receive an equitable trial. Trump’s response to Kaplan’s comment about throwing him out of the courtroom, where he said he would love it, was seen as a telling comment by John E. Jones III, a retired federal judge. Jones believes that Kaplan doesn’t want to martyr Trump by throwing him out and risking the perception that Trump is standing up to the judge.
Jones predicts that the jury may not view Habba favorably due to her disruptive behavior in the courtroom. Juries typically feel connected to the trial judge and may be uncomfortable with courtroom strife, which can impact their verdict. Jones finds it fascinating that Trump is using the trial as a campaign appearance to rally his base while potentially facing a massive financial verdict. The contradiction lies in the fact that he may have to pay a significant sum of money despite riling up his supporters.
Overall, Jones believes that this trial is intriguing, and it remains to be seen where the jury will stand. Habba’s interruptions and disruptive behavior may alienate the jury, and Trump’s provocative actions could backfire if he ends up with a substantial financial judgment against him.
