from Mike Caplow
Today’s Seattle Times’s headline describing a Justice Department’s investigation of E. Jean Carroll’s conflict with Donald Trump reads: “Feds Target Woman Trump Allegedly Assaulted”.
Although the headline serves to attract attention and introduce the subject, its use of assault and allege distorts history.
Assault was not the charge against Trump, he was charged (and convicted) of sexual abuse. US District Judge Lewis A Kaplan noted “The finding that Ms Carroll failed to prove that she was ‘raped’ within the meaning of the New York Penal Law does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape’. Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”
Similarly, summarizing the issue as alleged ignores the truth, the allegations made by Ms Carroll against Trump were affirmed by the jury and the conviction that was upheld by the 2nd Circuit of Appeals.
Using the term assault rather than sexual abuse ignores core differences between these crimes. Assault is use of physical force or threat of harm, whereas sexual abuse involves sexual contact or exploitation. Although both crimes may be classified as a misdemeanor or a felony, the penalty for sexual abuse is generally more severe and may require registration as a sex offender.
The Seattle Time’s headline distorting history was not unique, the headline in four other prominent papers refer to Trump as being accused, rather convicted. Ms Carroll is repeatedly described as an accuser rather than as Trump’s victim.
The headlines were:
Washington Post: “The Latest: DOJ opens investigation into E. Jean Carroll, who accused Trump of assault, source says”
Wall Street Journal: Justice Department Opens Probe Into Trump Accuser E. Jean Carroll.
The Hill: “DOJ launches investigation into Trump accuser E. Jean Carroll”
New York Post: “DOJ opens perjury investigation into Trump’s sex abuse accuser”
One might ask whether these headlines distort history or merely reflect careless writing. My test is simple: imagine how the headlines would read if the figures involved were a frequently convicted sex offender and beloved public figure, rather than the president of the United States and an almost anonymous citizen. In this case the crime would be sexual abuse and the word “alleged” would not appear.
The distortions here are not trivial. We are watching history being rewritten in real time.