As most know Trump was ordered to pay 83.3 million in damages to E. Jean Carroll. Of the 83, more than 60 was to deter him from doing it again The reason she won was because Trump said he didn't rape her along with other unflattering language. Sounds simple right? Let’s start from the beginning.

How it began
In 2019  E Jean Carroll wrote a book and in it she accused Trump of raping her in Bergdorf Goodman’s in the 1990s  Trump, president at the time, denied the rape accusation. E Jean Carroll then sued him for that denial claiming defamation.

The Survivors Act
The statute of limitations expired for a rape criminal trial. This is because over time, memories fade, evidence is lost, and witnesses disappear.  The Survivors act extended those limitations by 2 years but only for civil court. It expired in Novemeber 2023

The Courts
The courts decided before they could have a defamation trial, there had to be a trial to determine if Trump was liable for rape. They did this because for there to be defamation, it has to be proven he was liable and his denial was an easily proven lie.

The Civil Trial
The jury in the trial was given 3 options: Trump was liable for Rape, liable for sexual abuse or liable for neither. Civil court is very different from criminal court, only a majority is needed. During the trial there were tense exchanges and accusations between the judge, Trump and Trumps lawyer.

The Verdict
The jury unanimously found Trump was not liable not rape but a majority found he was liable for sexual abuse.

If you are still reading you may be asking how was it defamation if the jury didn’t find him liable for rape? Read on.

The Judge
After the verdict Trump once again said he didn’t rape Carroll in “colorfull words” and Carroll once again sued him for defamation. Although the jury in the previous trial found Trump not liable for rape, the judge explained in the second defamation trial that he was liable because the public sees no distinction between sexual abuse and rape despite the verdict.

Why does what the judge said matter?
In law words matter. If Trump said he did not rape her which echoes the verdict of the jury, he could not have committed defamation because the statement was true. But when the judge redefined the verdict to say sexual abuse was indeed rape, the second jury had to deem his rape denial false. That made it defamation

What might be in an Appeal?
We know Trump will be citing judicial bias but one can suspect the main focus would be on the judges redefining of “rape” to the jury.