Writer wants Trump’s deposition in rape lawsuit made public

January 13, 2023 Larry Neumeister, Associated Press

E. Jean Carroll. Photo: John Minchillo/AP

Share this:

Lawyers for a longtime advice columnist who says Donald Trump raped her a quarter century ago in a department store dressing room told a judge Thursday that the former president’s fall deposition should be made public.

The lawyers for writer E. Jean Carroll filed papers in Manhattan federal court to support her most recent lawsuit against the former president and oppose the effort by Trump’s lawyers to toss it out.

Carroll, a former Elle magazine columnist, first sued Trump for defamation after he mocked claims she made in a 2019 book that Trump raped her in an upscale Manhattan store’s dressing room in late 1995 or early 1996 after a lighthearted chance encounter turned violent.

Trump has denied knowing Carroll and has repeatedly denied the encounter took place, calling her allegations “a complete con job.” He also said “she’s not my type.”

Among the papers her lawyers filed was a letter urging Judge Lewis A. Kaplan to order the unsealing of Trump’s October deposition. Kaplan ordered it unsealed earlier this week, but rescinded the order after Trump’s lawyers complained that they had not been given adequate opportunity to oppose the unsealing.

Lawyers for Carroll said redacted excerpts from Trump’s deposition were included in written arguments they submitted late Thursday as they urged Kaplan to reject Trump’s attempt to toss out the rape claim.

“No other witness has requested that their depositions remain sealed,” the lawyers wrote.

They noted that Carroll did not request the sealing of her deposition, excerpts of which Trump’s lawyers cited in their arguments asking that the lawsuit be dismissed.

The civil rape claim by Carroll was made in November after New York state passed the temporary Adult Survivor’s Act, a law allowing adult victims of sexual abuse to sue their abusers, even if attacks occurred decades ago.

Trump’s lawyers have opposed the lawsuit on multiple grounds, including by challenging validity of the state law.

They argued in an earlier filing that the law violates the New York State Constitution, was an invasion of due process and a “clear abuse of legislative power.”