What was the jury’s reasoning and damages award in the E. Jean Carroll v. Trump civil trial?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The civil juries found that Donald J. Trump sexually abused E. Jean Carroll in a Manhattan department‑store encounter in the mid‑1990s and later defamed her by publicly denying her account, and a series of federal rulings and appeals have affirmed multi‑million dollar awards tied to those findings [1] [2]. The core May 2023 verdict that first held Trump liable resulted in a $5 million judgment that has been characterized in the record as including awards for sexual abuse and related defamatory statements, followed by a separate January 2024 damages verdict tied to presidential‑era statements that reached $83.3 million and was later upheld on appeal [3] [4] [5].
1. The factual and evidentiary thread the jury credited
Jurors were presented with Carroll’s account of an assault in a Bergdorf Goodman fitting room, contemporaneous conversations she had with friends, a 1987 photo of Carroll and Trump, videotaped deposition excerpts and the 2005 “Access Hollywood” tape, as well as testimony from two other women who described separate alleged encounters with Trump — evidence the trial court permitted and that the jury found persuasive by a preponderance standard [3] [6]. The trial judge, Lewis Kaplan, instructed jurors using New York law’s narrow statutory definition of “rape,” which the jurors did not find proven, but the jury did conclude that Carroll had been sexually abused — a legal distinction emphasized repeatedly in post‑trial rulings [2] [3].
2. How the jury framed its legal findings
The jury’s verdict form and the district court’s opinion explain that jurors distinguished between “rape” as narrowly defined under the penal code and the broader finding of sexual abuse; they unanimously concluded Trump was liable for sexual abuse by a preponderance of the evidence and separately concluded his public denials and attacks on Carroll were defamatory and done with the requisite malice for civil liability [6] [3]. The court later rejected defense arguments that the jury’s refusal to find statutory rape undermined the damage awards, explaining that the jury could reasonably credit the factual account of forcible digital penetration while still concluding the statutory elements of rape were not met [7] [2].
3. The damages: amounts and how they were apportioned
The initial civil judgment tied to the May 2023 liability finding is described in official filings and reporting as a $5 million award that covered Carroll’s sexual‑abuse claim and associated defamation tied to comments after the first trial; more detailed court documents show the sexual‑abuse portion included $2 million in compensatory damages and a small punitive sum ($20,000), with the balance reflected in the court’s overall $5 million judgment [1] [6] [2]. A later, separate January 2024 damages trial addressing statements Trump made while president in 2019 produced a far larger $83.3 million award — which the Second Circuit described as including roughly $18.3 million for emotional and reputational harm and $65 million in punitive damages — and that judgment has been affirmed on appeal [4] [5].
4. Judicial review and appellate posture
Judge Kaplan denied motions to reduce the award or order a new trial, finding the jury’s verdicts were supported by the evidence and that the damages were not excessive; the Second Circuit likewise affirmed the $5 million judgment and later upheld the $83.3 million defamation damages as reasonable in light of the conduct the juries found [2] [1] [4]. The defense has continued to press challenges — arguing evidentiary errors, contesting admission of testimony from other accusers and the Access Hollywood tape, and pointing to Carroll’s decisions about DNA testing — and has sought review up to the Supreme Court, which is canvassed in later filings and media coverage [8] [9] [10].
5. Competing narratives and what the rulings do and do not resolve
Supporters of Carroll point to unanimous juror findings of sexual abuse and the courts’ repeated affirmations as validation that the evidence met civil standards; critics and Trump’s legal team contend the trial court allowed inflammatory propensity evidence and excluded certain rebuttals, arguing the process produced an unfair result — arguments that appellate panels have rejected as harmless or without merit [6] [8] [11]. The record is clear, per the trial and appeals courts: jurors did not find statutory rape under a narrow New York definition but did find by a preponderance that Carroll was sexually abused and defamed, and the resulting damages awards — $5 million from the initial liability proceedings and $83.3 million in the separate presidential‑statements damages trial — have been upheld on review [2] [4] [1].