The Establishments war on Donald Trump
See other The Establishments war on Donald Trump Articles
Title: XCLUSIVE Trump Sued By Teen ‘Sex Slave’ For Alleged ‘Rape’ — Donald Blasts ‘Disgusting’ Suit
Source:
Radar Online
URL Source: http://radaronline.com/celebrity-ne ... -abuse-jeffrey-epstein-claims/
Published: Apr 29, 2016
Author: Uncredited
Post Date: 2016-04-29 07:19:56 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 9237
Comments: 39
'The allegations are not only categorically false, but disgusting,' Trump tells RADAR Presidential frontrunner Donald Trump is fighting what could be the biggest election season bombshell yet — explosive court claims that he raped a woman when she was a teen. The woman — identified as Katie Johnson — filed documents in a California court on April 26, accusing Trump and billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein of “sexual abuse under threat of harm” and “conspiracy to deprive civil rights,” RadarOnline.com has exclusively learned. She filed the lawsuit herself — without legal representation — and is suing for $100 million. Trump told Radar moments ago: “The allegations are not only categorically false, but disgusting at the highest level and clearly framed to solicit media attention or, perhaps, are simply politically motivated. There is absolutely no merit to these allegations. Period.” Johnson’s complaint, obtained by Radar, alleges the duo forced “her to engage in various perverted and depraved sex acts by threatening physical harm to [her] and also her family,” “making her their sex slave” from June to September 1994. “She was subject to extreme sexual and physical abuse” from the age of 13, it’s claimed in the papers. Johnson alleged “she was enticed by promises of money and a modeling career to attend a series of underage sex parties held at the New York City residence” of Epstein “and attended by” Trump. “On the first occasion,” Johnson said she “was forced to manually stimulate Defendant Trump with the use of her hand … until he reached sexual orgasm.” “On the second occasion,” the documents state, she “was forced to orally copulate Defendant Trump by placing her mouth upon Defendant Trump’s erect penis until he reached sexual orgasm.” “On the third occasion,” she claimed she “was forced to engage in an unnatural lesbian sex act,” with a 12-year-old “sex slave.” “Both minors were forced to orally copulate Defendant Trump by placing their mouths simultaneously on his erect penis until he achieved sexual orgasm,” she claimed. But in a twist to the looming scandal, questions are already being raised about the validity of the woman’s allegations. A political source told Radar: “This is nothing short of a desperate plot to try and ruin Donald. It won’t work.” Radar has learned the address she listed on the court documents is a home that is foreclosed in Twentynine Palms, Calif. A neighbor, Danny Mira, told Radar that no one has lived at the home since its owner, David Stacey, died in October last year. Mira said he and other neighbors have kept a close watch on the home because it was overrun by drug addicts who squatted there while Stacey was hospitalized in the final days of his life. The neighbors, with the help of police, managed to clean up the home several months before Stacey’s death, Radar has learned. Sharon Rose, a local realtor, told Radar the property went into default shortly after Stacey’s death and was officially taken over by the bank on April 11 — 15 days before the woman filed her suit. What’s more, the phone number the woman listed on the court documents is not connected, and she also told the court she had less than $300 to her name in savings. In her court papers, Johnson alleged that she was “tied to a bed by Defendant Trump, who then proceeded to forcibly rape” her during a “savage sexual act.” Johnson also claimed that Epstein forced her to complete depraved sex acts as well, and that he and Trump even argued over who should take her virginity. She alleged that she was “fully warned on more than one occasion by both” Trump and Epstein “that were she ever to reveal any of the details of the sexual and physical abuse that she had suffered as a sex slave” that she “and her family would be in mortal danger.” She claimed she was told “that this would mean certain death for herself” and her family, “unless she remained silent forever on the exact details of the depraved and perverted sexual and physical abuse she had been forced to endure.” Story developing. 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 17.
#17. To: cranky, Gatlin, Deckard, misterwhite, Vicomte13 (#0)
https://www.scribd.com/doc/310835987/Donald-Trump-Lawsuit This case was filed in Federal court to attempt to take advantage of the Federal statute of limitations law as revised in 2006. This attempt appears to be futile. The COMPLAINT appears to have been pepared by an attorney and filed by Katie Johnson, Pro Per, so no attorney is listed. http://law.justia.com/codes/us/2013/title-18/part-ii/chapter-213/section-3283/ Offenses against children - 18 U.S.C. § 3283 (2013) §3283. Offenses against children No statute of limitations that would otherwise preclude prosecution for an offense involving the sexual or physical abuse, or kidnaping, of a child under the age of 18 years shall preclude such prosecution during the life of the child, or for ten years after the offense, whichever is longer. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 828; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, §330018(a), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2149; Pub. L. 108–21, title II, §202, Apr. 30, 2003, 117 Stat. 660; Pub. L. 109–162, title XI, §1182(c), Jan. 5, 2006, 119 Stat. 3126.) HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES Based on title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §584 (R.S. §1046; July 5, 1884, ch. 225, §2, 23 Stat. 122). Words "customs laws" were substituted for "revenue laws," since different limitations are provided for internal revenue violations by section 3748 of title 26, U.S.C., 1940 ed., Internal Revenue Code. This section was held to apply to offenses under the customs laws. Those offenses are within the term "revenue laws" but not within the term "internal revenue laws". United States v. Hirsch (1879, 100 U.S. 33, 25 L. Ed. 539), United States v. Shorey (1869, Fed. Cas. No. 16,282), and United States v. Platt (1840, Fed. Cas. No. 16,054a) applied this section in customs cases. Hence it appears that there was no proper basis for the complete elimination from section 584 of title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., of the reference to revenue laws. Meaning of "revenue laws". United States v. Norton (1876, 91 U.S. 566, 23 L.Ed. 454), quoting Webster that "revenue" refers to "The income of a nation, derived from its taxes, duties, or other sources, for the payment of the national expenses." Quoting United States v. Mayo (1813, Fed. Cas. No. 15,755) that "revenue laws" meant such laws "as are made for the direct and avowed purpose of creating revenue or public funds for the service of the Government." Definition of revenue. "Revenue" is the income of a State, and the revenue of the Post Office Department, being raised by a tax on mailable matter conveyed in the mail, and which is disbursed in the public service, is as much a part of the income of the government as moneys collected for duties on imports (United States v. Bromley, 53 U.S. 88, 99, 13 L. Ed. 905). "Revenue" is the product or fruit of taxation. It matters not in what form the power of taxation may be exercised or to what subjects it may be applied, its exercise is intended to provide means for the support of the Government, and the means provided are necessarily to be regarded as the internal revenue. Duties upon imports are imposed for the same general object and, because they are so imposed, the money thus produced is considered revenue, not because it is derived from any particular source (United States v. Wright, 1870, Fed. Cas. No. 16,770). "Revenue law" is defined as a law for direct object of imposing and collecting taxes, dues, imports, and excises for government and its purposes (In re Mendenhall, D.C. Mont. 1935, 10 F. Supp. 122). Act Cong. March 2, 1799, ch. 22, 1 Stat. 627, regulating the collection of duties on imports, is a revenue law, within the meaning of act Cong. April 18, 1818, ch. 70, 3 Stat. 433, providing for the mode of suing for and recovering penalties and forfeitures for violations of the revenue laws of the United States (The Abigail, 1824, Fed. Cas. No. 18). Changes were made in phraseology. AMENDMENTS 2006—Pub. L. 109–162 inserted ", or for ten years after the offense, whichever is longer" after "of the child". 2003—Pub. L. 108–21 substituted "Offenses against children" for "Child abuse offenses" in section catchline and amended text generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: "No statute of limitations that would otherwise preclude prosecution for an offense involving the sexual or physical abuse of a child under the age of 18 years shall preclude such prosecution before the child reaches the age of 25 years." 1994—Pub. L. 103–322 substituted "Child abuse offenses" for "Customs and slave trade violations" as section catchline and amended text generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: "No person shall be prosecuted, tried or punished for any violation of the customs laws or the slave trade laws of the United States unless the indictment is found or the information is instituted within five years next after the commission of the offense." https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL31253.pdf Charles Doyle [excerpt - page 2] Limitation-related constitutional challenges arise most often under the Constitution’s ex post facto and due process clauses. The federal courts have long held that a statute of limitations may be enlarged retroactively as long as the previously applicable period of limitation has not expired. The Supreme Court recently confirmed that view; the ex post facto proscription precludes legislative revival of an expired period of limitation. Due process condemns pre-indictment delays even when permitted by the statute of limitations if the prosecution wrongfully caused the delay and the accused’s defense suffered actual, substantial harm as a consequence.
There are no replies to Comment # 17. End Trace Mode for Comment # 17.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest 2013 US Code
Title 18 - Crimes and Criminal Procedure
Part II - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (§§ 3001 - 3771)
Chapter 213 - LIMITATIONS (§§ 3281 - 3301)
Section 3283 - Offenses against children Statutes of Limitation in Federal Criminal Cases: An Overview
Senior Specialist in American Public Law
Congressional Research Service
October 1, 2012
Replies to Comment # 17.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]