Is this what actually happened? All the news articles posted are saying that he has to pay her $5 million as proof he raped her. Or something like that. So if he didn’t do anything then why is he paying her $5 million?
The $5 million is because of 'defamation' and has nothing to do with rape or sexual assault.
I thought it's like $2 million for vague 'sexual assault/harassment' (but not rape) and $3 million for defamation...which was I guess him saying he didn't rape her, when it was found he didn't rape her.
Not sure what the sexual assault allegation is exactly, but to say it's completely lacking from the $5 million isn't true, from what I've seen. Which, to be clear, is not me saying that finding is legitimate, just that that's what the jury said.
Is this what actually happened? All the news articles posted are saying that he has to pay her $5 million as proof he raped her. Or something like that. So if he didn’t do anything then why is he paying her $5 million?
The $5 million is because of 'defamation' and has nothing to do with rape or sexual assault.
They are just lying.
I thought it's like $2 million for vague 'sexual assault/harassment' (but not rape) and $3 million for defamation...which was I guess him saying he didn't rape her, when it was found he didn't rape her.
Not sure what the sexual assault allegation is exactly, but to say it's completely lacking from the $5 million isn't true, from what I've seen. Which, to be clear, is not me saying that finding is legitimate, just that that's what the jury said.
I think you might be correct, but it is all moot because they'll throw this out on appeal.