Trump loses appeal of $5 million E. Jean Carroll sexual abuse, defamation verdict

[moniss]

12. Many people, including Crumb the 1st, have the idea

that when a trial court hears evidence and decides against them that they can go and argue the evidence all over again at the appellate level and on up. So they keep arguing the evidence/testimony over and over publicly saying "They got it wrong and I'll appeal." As noted here the appellate courts will hear arguments about procedural errors and objections made at trial etc. but they do not provide a place for you to re-argue the evidence.

Just like when a Bozo's that get a "not guilty" verdict in a trial and then go and claim that the verdict proves they didn't do it. The verdict doesn't prove anything of the kind. The verdict finds the other side didn't prove their case to the point of swaying the judge/jury to take away the presumption of innocence. In other words despite having a presumption of innocence a person may as a matter of fact committed the crime. Plenty of people walking around who get found "not guilty" but in fact did commit the crime. The verdict doesn't take away the reality of the true fact.