Fact check: Has Trump been convicted of a sex crime?

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, Donald Trump has not been convicted of a sex crime in criminal court. However, he has faced significant civil liability for sexual misconduct ^{[1] [2]}.

The key legal finding is that a jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse in a civil case brought by E. Jean Carroll, awarding her $5 million in damages, though the jury did not find him liable for rape ^[1]. This represents a civil judgment, not a criminal conviction, which is a crucial legal distinction ^[2].

Approximately two dozen women have accused Trump of various forms of sexual harassment and assault dating back to the 1970s, with allegations ranging from groping and unwanted kissing to more serious claims of sexual assault ^[3]. These allegations include documented incidents such as the 2005 Access Hollywood tape and accusations from multiple women across different time periods ^[4].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks important context about the distinction between criminal convictions and civil liability. While Trump has not been criminally convicted of a sex crime, the civil court finding of sexual abuse liability represents a significant legal determination made by a jury ^{[1] [2]}.

Alternative perspectives include:

• Trump's defenders would emphasize that he has never been criminally convicted and that civil cases have a lower burden of proof than criminal cases
• Trump's critics would highlight that a jury still found him liable for sexual abuse based on the evidence presented
• Legal experts might note that civil liability can exist independently of criminal prosecution

The analyses also reveal that Ghislaine Maxwell denied Trump was involved in Jeffrey Epstein's crimes, providing some context to broader allegations ^[5]. Additionally, Trump has pardoned individuals with prior convictions for sex crimes and other violent offenses, which some might view as relevant context ^[6].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question itself is not inherently biased, but it could lead to misleading interpretations if the answer doesn't clarify the difference between criminal convictions and civil liability.

Potential sources of confusion:

• The question uses "convicted," which typically refers to criminal proceedings, but Trump's most significant legal consequence has been civil liability
• Without proper context, people might assume that lack of criminal conviction means no legal findings of wrongdoing occurred
• The question doesn't acknowledge the extensive documented allegations from approximately two dozen women spanning decades ^{[7] [8]}

Political actors on both sides would benefit from different framings of this issue - Trump supporters from emphasizing the lack of criminal conviction, while opponents would highlight the civil court finding and numerous allegations.