Facebook-f Linkedin Instagram Youtube
Lawdit Solicitors Law Firm logo
Book a Consultation

Jean Carroll v Donald Trump; Donald Trump v Jean Carroll: Allegations of rape v defamation

Here is everything you need to know about Jean Carroll v Donald Trump. Jean Carroll has filed two legal claims against former United States of America (US) President, Donald Trump. One is a defamation claim in which Ms Carroll is seeking around $10 million dollars following Mr Trump’s comments on CNN where he denied Ms Carrols allegations and made ‘disparaging remarks’ about her.

The other claim was heard last month (09 May 2023) by a civil jury in New York which found that Mr Trump sexually abused Ms Carroll and defamed her but he did not rape her. The jury found Mr Trump liable for sexually abusing Ms Carroll in a department store in the 1990s and then defaming her in the 2019 when she went public with the allegation. Ms Carroll was awarded almost $5 million dollars in damages. Mr Trump is appealing against the verdict and has asked for a new trial.

Jean Carroll v Donald Trump
© Gage Skidmore (Wikimedia Commons License)

Since the finding Ms Carroll appeared on CNN and when asked about Mr Trumps liability for rape she responded with the comments ‘oh yes he did, oh yes he did’.

Mr Trump has since filed his own defamation claim against Ms Carroll seeking a retraction of the above comment and unspecified punitive damages. The claim alleges that Ms Carroll made ‘false statements with actual malice and ill will’.

Defamation in the US v England and Wales:

In the US, the common law developments have resulted in public figures and officials, which includes celebrities and certainly Mr Trump, not being entitled to damages for defamation without proving malicious falsehood. Malicious falsehood means with knowledge that the statement was false, or with reckless disregard as to whether or not it was true. The claimant has the burden of proving that the defendant acted with malice which is no easy task. However, persons deemed not to be public figures or officials do not need to establish malicious falsehood for compensatory damages but malice is the standard if they wish to recover punitive or exemplary damages.

In England and Wales, there is no requirement for the claimant to prove malicious falsehood for claims in libel and slander (defamation). In a defamation claim, the claimant alleges a false defamatory statement and the burden of proof falls on the defendant to prove the truth of the statement or establish one of the other defences. Please note, that in this jurisdiction you could make a claim in malicious falsehood but that would be a separate claim and possibly an alternative to a defamation claim.

If you have any questions regarding this article, or a claim in defamation, then please telephone our office at 02380 235979

By Samuel Killoran

References for Jean Carroll v Donald Trump

Here are some references for Jean Carroll v Donald Trump. We hope you will find them useful, please see them below.

Posts related Jean Carroll v Donald Trump

If you’re looking for more articles and enjoyed reading this article about Jean Carroll v Donald Trump, please look at more articles related to Jean Carroll v Donald Trump below.

share this Article

Recent Articles

Written By:

Picture of Michael Coyle

Michael Coyle

Michael is Lawdit’s Principal and heads our Commercial and Intellectual Property Department. As a Solicitor Advocate, he is one of a select group of legal experts qualified to represent clients as an advocate in the Higher Courts in England and Wales. He holds a Master of Laws degree (LL.M) from Nottingham Trent University and is a guest lecturer at Southampton Solent University. He has also completed a teaching stint at the Academy of Music in Guildford where Michael taught copyright law. Michael is highly regarded for his work in all areas of intellectual property law (which includes the eCommerce and IT fields), litigation and company/commercial matters. He regularly advises on non-contentious issues including regulatory and statutory obligations and has been involved in many successful disputes, with a strong reputation for finding common sense and practical solutions for clients. In 2017, Michael was awarded the honorary degree of Doctor of Law from Southampton Solent University for his contribution to the University and his continued support to its students.