Jury Finds Trump Liable for Sexual Abuse and Defamation of E. Jean Carroll, Awards $5 Million

A nine-person federal jury in Manhattan found Donald Trump liable for sexually abusing and defaming E. Jean Carroll, awarding her $5 million in damages after deliberating for less than three hours in a civil trial presided over by U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan. The verdict, reached on May 9, 2023, marked the first time Trump had been found legally responsible for sexual assault and represented a historic moment in American jurisprudence—a jury determining that a former U.S. president committed sexual violence. The jury awarded Carroll $2 million in compensatory damages for battery, along with $20,000 in punitive damages, and $2.7 million in compensatory damages plus $280,000 in punitive damages for defamation based on Trump’s October 2022 statements on Truth Social calling Carroll’s allegations “a complete con job” and “a Hoax and a lie.” Significantly, the jury concluded that Carroll had proven Trump sexually abused her but did not find sufficient evidence to meet New York Penal Law’s narrow technical definition of rape, which requires penile penetration specifically.

The trial, which began on April 25, 2023, featured testimony from Carroll describing the mid-1990s assault in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room, where she testified Trump forcibly kissed her, pulled down her tights, and penetrated her vagina with his fingers while she struggled to escape. Two of Carroll’s friends testified that she had confided in them shortly after the assault—Lisa Birnbach, who advised Carroll to go to the police, and Carol Martin, who counseled against it given Trump’s wealth and connections. The trial also included testimony from two other women who accused Trump of sexual assault, Jessica Leeds and Natasha Stoynoff, whose accounts were admitted to establish a pattern of conduct. Trump chose not to testify in person or present any defense witnesses, instead offering videotaped deposition testimony in which he repeated his denials and made statements that prosecutors used to undermine his credibility, including his infamous comment that Carroll was “not my type” and his inability to distinguish a photograph of Carroll from his ex-wife Marla Maples.

Judge Kaplan’s “Rape” Clarification

In July 2023, when Judge Kaplan denied Trump’s motion for a new trial and upheld the $5 million verdict, he issued a clarification that reverberated through legal and political circles: while the jury had not found Trump liable for “rape” under New York Penal Law’s technical definition, the evidence proved he had raped Carroll under the common understanding of the term. Judge Kaplan wrote that “the proof convincingly established, and the jury implicitly found, that Mr. Trump deliberately and forcibly penetrated Ms. Carroll’s vagina with his fingers, causing immediate pain and long lasting emotional and psychological harm.” The judge explained that the jury’s finding of sexual abuse rather than rape reflected only “the narrow, technical meaning of a particular section of the New York Penal Law” which defines rape as penile penetration specifically, whereas forcible digital penetration constitutes “sexual abuse” under state law.

Judge Kaplan emphasized that this legal technicality should not obscure what the jury actually found: “the finding that Ms. Carroll failed to prove that she was ‘raped’ within the meaning of the New York Penal Law does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape.’ Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.” In August 2023, when dismissing Trump’s countersuit against Carroll, Judge Kaplan went further, explicitly stating that the verdict “establishes, as against Mr. Trump, the fact that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her, albeit digitally rather than with his penis. Thus, it establishes against him the substantial truth of Ms. Carroll’s ‘rape’ allegations.” This judicial clarification became legally significant because it meant Carroll could truthfully describe Trump as someone a jury found had raped her, and Trump could not sue her for defamation for making that characterization.

Political and Legal Implications

The verdict landed while Trump was the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, creating the extraordinary situation of a leading presidential candidate who had been found civilly liable for sexual assault. Trump’s response was characteristically defiant—he called the verdict “a disgrace” and “a continuation of the greatest witch hunt of all time” on Truth Social, and his campaign quickly weaponized the finding by arguing it proved the case was politically motivated. However, legal experts noted that Trump’s continued attacks on Carroll after the verdict created significant legal risk, as any further defamatory statements could trigger additional lawsuits and damages.

The $5 million award was notable for being relatively modest given the severity of the findings—juries in similar high-profile sexual assault cases have awarded tens of millions of dollars. However, Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan indicated satisfaction with the verdict because it established the truth of the assault and vindicated Carroll’s decision to come forward. The jury’s relatively quick deliberation suggested strong consensus about Trump’s liability, and the inclusion of punitive damages signaled the jury’s conclusion that Trump’s conduct warranted punishment beyond mere compensation for harm.

Significance

This verdict represented unprecedented legal accountability for a former U.S. president, establishing in a federal court of law that Donald Trump committed sexual violence against E. Jean Carroll. The finding carried both immediate and long-term consequences: it provided legal validation for Carroll and potentially other Trump accusers, established a court record of Trump’s sexual misconduct that could be cited in future legal proceedings, and created a political liability for Trump’s 2024 campaign. The verdict also vindicated the Adult Survivors Act, demonstrating that the lookback window could successfully hold powerful perpetrators accountable for decades-old abuse.

Judge Kaplan’s clarification that Trump had “raped” Carroll under common understanding of the term, even if not under New York’s technical statutory definition, eliminated any ambiguity about the jury’s findings and prevented Trump from claiming exoneration on the rape allegation. This distinction would prove crucial in subsequent litigation, as it established that calling Trump a rapist was substantially true and therefore protected speech. The verdict’s implications extended beyond the Carroll case itself, as it provided a template for how sexual assault survivors could use civil litigation to obtain accountability when criminal prosecution was unavailable due to statutes of limitations or evidentiary challenges.

Most significantly, the case demonstrated that even the most powerful political figures could be held responsible for sexual violence when survivors were willing to come forward and when legal mechanisms like the Adult Survivors Act removed procedural barriers to justice. Trump’s decision not to testify in person—reportedly out of fear his combative personality would alienate jurors—may have contributed to the verdict, as it prevented him from directly confronting Carroll’s testimony while his absence allowed prosecutors to present his most damaging deposition statements. The $5 million verdict would prove to be only the beginning of Carroll’s legal victories, as Trump’s inability to stop attacking her publicly would lead to a second trial and a staggering $83.3 million damages award just nine months later, demonstrating that the initial verdict had done nothing to curb his defamatory conduct.