Just minutes after leaving the first day of his civil trial, Rudy Giuliani repeated a false allegation about the pollworkers.

Rudy Giuliani’s defiant public statements outside a Washington, D.C., federal courthouse — just minutes after he departed the first day of his civil trial for defaming two Georgia election workers — may have defamed them yet again, the judge presiding over the proceedings said Tuesday.

“Was Mr. Giuliani just playing for the cameras?” wondered U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell, who has already found Giuliani liable for lying about the workers, Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, by accusing them of manipulating ballots in the 2020 election.

His attorney, Joe Sibley, agreed that he could not reconcile Giuliani’s out-of-court comments on Monday evening with the more contrite argument Sibley had made on behalf of the former New York City mayor earlier in the day.

After the first day of his trial, when jurors began to hear evidence to determine just how much Giuliani must pay for defaming the two women, Giuliani approached television cameras outside the courthouse and reiterated his attacks on them.

  • @PrinceWith999Enemies
    link
    181 year ago

    Question for the legally aware:

    I’ve seen many cases where the court will adjust jury-awarded penalties downward. A jury might find a chemical company liable in polluting a river and award the claimants $100M, and the court will adjust it to $5M.

    The justice and potential for corruption etc aside, could the judge in a case like this and given an event like this increase the amount Rudy must pay over and above the $43M or whatever it is that’s being asked? Could the court say that the impenitent and repeatedly offending nature of Rudy merits additional penalties above and beyond what was asked for in the context of this case, or like with the Trump defamation case would it need a separate trial?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      191 year ago

      In E Jean Carrolls case against Trump, after the judge awarded her $5mil, Trump walked out of the courtroom and lied to the camera, again, even having just lost on it.

      The attorney filed a motion against Trump the next day asking for double damages and was promptly awarded it. $10mil total.

      So yea, the judge has some discretion.

    • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】
      link
      8
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yes, the terms are additur (adding money to the jury’s award) and remittitur (taking money away from from the jury’s award. It happens when the jury’s award is obviously too much or not enough.

      Additur is very rare. Basically requires an inconsistent verdict or a clearly wrong application of the facts by the jury, such as if the jury found the defendant solely liable for destroying the plaintiff’s car and the value of the car was never disputed and accepted by everyone to be $10,000, but the jury only awards $5,000 in compensation. One reason it’s so rare is because if the value of a thing is not really in dispute, usually the parties will stipulate to its value.

      Remittitur is much more common. Most state courts hold that the damages awarded must have some basis in the evidence, and the figure cannot simply be pulled from thin air. Even with punitive damages, a smart plaintiff puts in some evidence of the defendant’s total worth or profits.