“Was the jury allowed to hear testimony about this fact?”
The first jury, or the second?
AFAIK the first jury would have been allowed to hear testimony about the setup at the store. More importantly, it would have been allowed to hear Trump testify that Carroll was lying. The problem is that Trump, on advice of his lawyer, didn’t testify. So the first jury heard only Carroll’s version. No surprise they ruled against Trump.
Trump now says he got bad legal advice. Yeah, he did — but it’s well-established law that an issue resolved by a jury is binding on future juries in cases with the same parties. Courts don’t want to keep re-litigating settled questions. That’s why, at the second trial, Trump wasn’t allowed to give his version of events.
Wrong; no jury heard anything at all about what I posted!