Justice Department Opens Criminal Inquiry Into E. Jean Carroll Perjury Allegations in Civil Lawsuits Against Trump
The investigation is said to center on whether Ms. Carroll committed perjury in civil lawsuits against Donald J. Trump, whom she accused of sexual assault. Federal prosecutors have launched a criminal probe into allegations that writer E. Jean Carroll made false statements under oath during her defamation and battery cases against the former president. The inquiry, confirmed by sources familiar with the matter, examines testimony from Carroll v. Trump proceedings that concluded with a jury verdict in her favor.
Scope of the Federal Perjury Probe
The Justice Department’s criminal investigation focuses on whether Carroll’s sworn statements in two civil lawsuits violated federal perjury statutes. According to legal documents, the probe targets contradictions between Carroll’s trial testimony and prior public statements, as well as inconsistencies in her accounts of the alleged assault in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room during the 1990s. Investigators are reviewing deposition transcripts, court exhibits, and correspondence with attorneys to determine if any false statements were made knowingly.
Background on Carroll v. Trump Litigation
Carroll first sued Trump for defamation in 2019 after he denied her rape allegation and called her claim a “hoax.” A second lawsuit, filed in 2022 under New York’s Adult Survivors Act, added a battery claim. In May 2023, a Manhattan federal jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing and defaming Carroll, awarding her $5 million in damages. A second trial in January 2024 resulted in an $83.3 million defamation judgment against Trump, which he is appealing. The perjury inquiry does not challenge those verdicts but rather examines Carroll’s own conduct during the legal proceedings.
Key Evidence Under Review
Prosecutors are analyzing Carroll’s testimony about the timing and details of the alleged assault, including her statements that she could not remember the exact date but later provided a specific year. Investigators are also scrutinizing her claims about destroying a dress she wore that day and her descriptions of the encounter to friends. The inquiry reportedly includes interviews with individuals who spoke with Carroll about the incident before she went public in a 2019 New York Magazine excerpt from her memoir “What Do We Need Men For?”. No charges have been filed, and the investigation remains preliminary.
Potential Legal Implications
If the probe finds evidence of perjury, Carroll could face federal charges carrying up to five years in prison for each false statement count. Legal experts note that perjury cases in civil lawsuits are rare but have been pursued when contradictions are clear and material to the case outcome. Trump’s legal team has publicly called for the investigation, citing what they describe as “irreconcilable inconsistencies” in Carroll’s account. Carroll’s attorney has denied any wrongdoing, stating that her client testified truthfully and that the inquiry is politically motivated.
Context
The investigation mirrors other high-profile perjury probes in civil cases, such as the 2003 inquiry into Martha Stewart for false statements about a stock sale, which led to a conviction for obstruction of justice. In 2019, former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort was convicted of witness tampering and conspiracy after lying in a civil deposition. The Carroll case adds to a pattern of federal prosecutors examining sworn testimony in politically charged civil litigation.