Vacate New York

The people of the State of New York have issued fair warning to all men and women of financial substance, particularly if they are conservative. If you stay, your wealth and freedom are at risk. If you doubt this warning, ask former President Donald Trump. Within the past six months, functionaries of the State of New York, claiming the color of law, have seized his personal income tax returns, information that all of us have long believed, evidently erroneously, to be sacrosanct; indicted him for “crimes” that are risible on their faces and that have sparked numerous scathing articles by legal scholars dismayed at the misuse of the legal system; and, most lately, obtained a civil judgment against him for battery and defamation. This last outrage is, in some ways, the most egregious. The plaintiff in the case, one E. Jean Carroll, alleged that Mr. Trump had raped her in the 1990s and then defamed her by denying that he did it. Now think about that one for a moment. Ratcatcher is not a lawyer, but we are pretty sure that the statute of limitations has run on any claim for damages resulting from a rape in any part of the 1990s. We are informed that the tort of “battery” can be alleged as part of a rape, but that battery, if it occurred, happened when the alleged rape occurred and would be time barred. Ms. Carroll, seeking fame and notoriety, accused Mr. Trump of the rape in public utterances. He denied the rape. But notice: accusing someone of rape is accusing him of a crime, defamation as a matter of law. As far as Ratcatcher can determine, Mr. Trump never sued Ms. Carroll for defamation, choosing, instead, to deny the claim publicly and leave it out of the courts. Not so, Ms. Carroll.

Stitching together a sow’s ear from a silk purse, Ms. Carroll claimed not just the battery, but also that Mr. Trump had defamed her by denying the rape. How is that possible, you ask? So did we and there is no plausible explanation other than the nature of the jury -- all drawn from New York City. How can it possibly be that a man who denies an act which is, itself, time barred, can be held liable for denying the act? If we were transported suddenly with Alice to Wonderland we might be able to understand this travesty. But without such magic, it boggles the mind and can only be explained by the animus that New York jurors bear for wealthy conservatives. Donald Trump satisfied both requirements; hence, he was liable before the trial ever began. Candidly, the judge should just have informed Mr. Trump and his lawyers that, given Trump’ status, the court would dispense with the formalities and bother of a trial and proceed directly to judgment.

WARNING: If you have wealth and are known to be conservative, you should consider leaving New York. Perhaps that explains the huge exodus of wealth from New York already underway.

NOTE: If you have found this post interesting or helpful, please refer Ratcatcher.net to your friends. Ratcatcher invites you to leave a Comment or send an email to catcher@ratcatcher.net. Ratcatcher will respond to all civil emails.