Written by Christopher Bennett.
The New York Police Department recently took possession of an unlicensed firearm from writer E. Jean Carroll, one month after she disclosed its existence during testimony in a defamation lawsuit against former President Donald Trump.
Police Response to Unlicensed Firearm
E. Jean Carroll, while testifying on January 17, admitted to keeping a “high standard revolver, nine chambers” by her bed without a valid New York pistol license. This revelation prompted the Warwick, N.Y. police chief to visit Carroll’s home on February 15 to resolve the issue. Officer John Rader reported that he “offered to secure the weapon at the police station’s property for safekeeping,” to which Carroll agreed, surrendering the gun the following day.
Legal Implications and Lack of Charges
Under New York law, possessing an unlicensed firearm is a grave offense, carrying potential felony charges with severe penalties, including up to four years in prison. Despite the serious nature of this violation, Carroll faces no criminal charges at this time, raising questions about the NYPD’s handling of the case.
Delayed Action and Trial Controversies
The delay in police action following Carroll’s January testimony and the reasons behind the decision not to press charges remain unclear. During the trial, Carroll’s gun ownership became a contentious issue, with Trump’s attorney, Alina Habba, scrutinizing Carroll’s understanding of legal gun ownership requirements. This line of questioning led to visible frustration from U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan.
Background of Carroll’s Accusations
In 2019, Carroll accused Donald Trump of raping her in the 1990s in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room. Trump has vehemently denied these allegations, referring to Carroll disparagingly. The jury in the defamation lawsuit ultimately sided with Carroll, finding Trump guilty of sexual abuse and defamation, awarding her a total of $83.3 million in damages.
Our Take
The NYPD’s handling of E. Jean Carroll’s unlicensed firearm case is a troubling reflection of potential inconsistencies in law enforcement. It is imperative for the integrity of the justice system that all individuals, regardless of their public stature or involvement in high-profile cases, are treated equally under the law. The delay and lack of charges in this case warrant a closer examination to ensure that justice is impartial and not influenced by external pressures or media attention. As conservatives, we uphold the principle that the law must be applied fairly and consistently, safeguarding the community while maintaining public trust in our legal institutions.
