Did the judge in the E Jean Carrol case say that Trump raped her?

1. What the judge actually said in court: legal instructions, not a conviction

During the civil trial Judge Kaplan explained the verdict form and described three categories under New York law — rape, sexual abuse and forcible touching — so jurors could apply the legal standards to the facts they heard; that judicial explanation is routine and does not itself amount to the judge declaring someone “raped” the plaintiff ^{[1] [4]}. Reporting and court documents say Kaplan asked jurors to decide if, by a preponderance of the evidence, Trump committed rape as narrowly defined at the time; the jury did not find him liable for rape ^{[1] [2]}.

2. What the jury found: sexual abuse and defamation, not rape liability

A Manhattan federal jury in May 2023 found Trump liable for sexually abusing E. Jean Carroll in the 1990s and for defaming her later, awarding $5 million for the sexual-abuse/defamation verdict; a separate damages trial produced an $83.3 million award for continued defamation that appeals courts later upheld ^{[2] [5]}. Multiple outlets explicitly note jurors rejected the rape theory but concluded sexual abuse occurred ^{[2] [3]}.

3. How media shorthand created confusion

Headlines and summaries sometimes compress complex legal steps into short phrases (“the case found he sexually abused and defamed” or “the jury found he raped her”), which can blur the distinction between a judge’s legal instructions and a jury’s factual decision. BBC, CNN and Reuters-style coverage repeatedly state the jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation; some sources add that Kaplan explained rape as a legal category jurors should consider ^{[4] [6] [1]}.

4. Appeals and judicial commentary shaped later interpretations

Federal appellate panels upheld the jury’s verdict and rejected Trump’s claims that Judge Kaplan improperly allowed propensity evidence (testimony from other women and the Access Hollywood tape) under rules that permit other-acts evidence in sexual-assault civil cases, reinforcing that the judge’s evidentiary and instructional choices were within judicial discretion ^{[7] [8]}. Appellate rulings and judge opinions — including Kaplan’s own comments that the jury’s findings might be characterized differently in other jurisdictions — were reported and cited as amplifying public confusion about the precise legal label applied by the jury ^{[3] [7]}.

5. Why sources disagree or emphasize different points

Some outlets highlight the jury’s ultimate finding of sexual abuse and the upholding of damages (CNBC, CNN, PBS), while others quote Trump’s lawyers accusing Kaplan of “warping” rules and call the allegations a “hoax” ^{[2] [6] [8]}. The legal teams’ adversarial filings, coupled with routine judicial explanations of law to jurors, feed competing narratives: defense filings portray the judge’s rulings as prejudicial ^[8], while courts and appeals panels repeatedly concluded there was no reversible error ^{[7] [9]}.

6. What is not in the available reporting

Available sources do not mention any instance where Judge Kaplan himself declared, as a factual finding in the record, that Trump had raped Carroll; rather they show he instructed the jury on rape as a possible legal finding and the jury rejected rape and found sexual abuse ^{[1] [3]}. Available sources do not report Kaplan pronouncing a criminal conviction — this was a civil case decided on preponderance of the evidence, not a criminal trial beyond a reasonable doubt ^{[1] [2]}.

7. Bottom line for readers: precise language matters

Court reporting confirms the jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation and that Judge Kaplan explained rape was one legal theory jurors could consider; the jury rejected that rape theory. Saying “the judge said Trump raped her” misstates the record: Judge Kaplan instructed on the legal definition and left the factual finding to jurors, who returned a sexual-abuse verdict ^{[1] [2]}.