E. Jean Carroll Accuses Donald Trump, the President of the United States, of rape in the mid-1990s on MSNBC with Mr. Lawrence.
There are many parts of her statement that I find very questionable, The host of MSMBC who did the interview should have asked Ms. Carroll an open ended question "tell us what happened" and let her talk. He starts off with a hit piece on Donald Trump I call this "priming" the audience before the interview.
Rape is a very serious crime, anyone who commits a violent sexual assault against a woman or child should be held accountable. I don't care if you are the President or not. My analysis is not based on any political bias. I am analyzing "her" words and "her" body language expressions.
This is my analysis:
I found the use of present tense language in her story the first red flag, everything should be stated and recalled in the past tense. First person singular past tense. When present tense language is used it is an indication of "logic" and "construction." The use of the number three. When people are being deceptive the use of the number is the first number that comes into mind, (three blind mice, make three wishes, rub the lamp three times, etc.) "We went into the dressing room." The use of the pronoun "we" at this portion of her story is acceptable here because the assault had not happened yet. Why would she allow Donald Trump to follow her into the dressing room. She stumbles on the part of her statement when talking about how he went through her dress. She should have stated he pulled up my dress. The lack of details on the rape itself. "It hurt" what hurt? His finger, his penis, his hand? She does not mention she yelled, screamed and cried for help. She held her handbag but did not use it to defend herself against trump. We also have an "out of order statement" she talks about being in the street holding her handbag she backs up her story and talks about being back in the dressing room again. When reliving a true auto biographical memory all the events should follow a chronological order. She also stated she was walking out of the store and Donald Trump was walking into the store, this would indicate they were both out of the store, she then states they were near the handbags. She does not mention they walked back into the store together.
Her memory was very good on certain parts of her story. Her four inch heels, the color of the body suit, one door being open in the dressing room but lacking details on the rape itself. She had out of placed emotions being stated during the alleged rape (during portion) emotions should be expressed after the alleged rape happened (after portion) when she had time to think about what happened. Her body language and facial expressions were off.
When a woman is reliving a true account of a rape many times than not she will touch her "neck dimple" because she is reliving a true auto biographical memory and the strong emotions attached to that memory come up with the event. She had to many smirks and smiles during the interview.
I did not know that Donald Trumps taxes returns were an issue twenty years ago. Her statement about not filling charges on a first degree rape was because of the women on the border and she did not want to disrespect them. The alleged rape happened twenty years ago. She should have answered why she did not report the rape twenty years ago. Not answer with a current day issue as to why she did not report the alleged rape. Donald Trump allegedly raped you, he is not raping women on the border. When she was asked why she kept the dress, she answers a question with a question. This is a time buying tactic to think about how she will answer his question.
Her statement lacks some detail. I believe there was an encounter with Donald Trump something happened but calling this a rape is questionable. I call this event "weaving a lie within a truthful statement." Some parts of her statement were true some parts were questionable.
