If the Kavanaugh accusations are true...

[Go Braves]

I suppose there is some merit to that, if we were dealing with an administration who cared about transparency and accountability. I dont think it would find anything substantive but I can see how it would have been almost automatic with Obama. I just think the allegation has only Ford as its source, so logically she would be questioned. I cant help but wonder what the consequence should be if she made the whole thing up.

If she lied about something & there's proof of that Kavanaugh could sue for libel but that's not going to happen. Remember how many times Trump threatened to sue women who accused him of sexual misconduct, saying they were making it up? All bluster. Instead they've sued him.

Either way, the consequence for coming forward has meant she's gotten death threats she had to turn over to the FBI, gotten harassed, had to go into hiding. Folks will be convinced she made the whole thing up no matter what. Some of the families of the little kids murdered in the Sandy Hook massacre have had to move 7 times on account of the crazies threatening their family, thinking that they made the whole thing up.

Anita Hill's career took off like a shot, she was celebrated as a hero

Well in doing some reading on that, that claim sure is only showing part of the story. She got death threats, professional threats.

This is from that time period, depicting Anita Hill

Should the FBI investigate what would they be sending their agents out to investigate? Where is the corroborating evidence, who were the other boys involved, why did she wait so long to tell anyone? How would you have the investigation directed?

It's called the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Investigating is in the job description. They would investigate the allegations. Friends of hers from the time said she did tell them about it then. She's gotten a lot of support from her classmates. The FBI would interview them about that.

The Catholic church has paid out millions on account of sexual abuse. Many of those victims have come forward in the 2000s about abuse that happened in the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s.

 

[Kentonio]

I was going to respond to this, but checked your country in your profile and decided it wouldn't be worth the trouble. Just wait until you're accused and come back here and tell me how it feels to be accused and not even be able to face the person who's accusing you.

So you have absolutely no good reason why one person physically facing another has any relevance?

If someone's accusations are true, why would it be intimidating to face the person you're testifying against.

Testifying is already a terrifying experience for most normal people. Testifying in front of congress and the world’s media, even more so. So on top of that, you think it shouldn’t bother a woman who believe someone tried to rape her, to have to have that same person staring at her as she tries to speak?

You really don’t understand anything about the trauma caused by sexual assault, do you?

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

Yep, this isn’t a court of law, and even if it was it’s a ridiculous so called right anyway.

Ordinarily, the defendant is present in court when the accuser testifies, so my point that she's insisting on extraordinary preconditions still stands. That you think it's ridiculous is quite beside the point...

People should have a right to hear what they’re accused of and to provide a defense to those accusations.

Providing a defense means being able to cross-examine witnesses against them, including the accuser.

 

[Kentonio]

No the accuser and accused need to be fairly heard. The Senate Judiciary Committee set Monday to hear both.

Seems the system is working.

Meanwhile the right wing press and supporters are falling over themselves to proclaim her a liar and slander her character at every turn. Because that’s what happens every time a woman accuses a prominent conservative of sexual assault or rape.

 

[Kentonio]

Providing a defense means being able to cross-examine witnesses against them, including the accuser.

His lawyer should certainly have the right to do so (if this was a court case). It would be extremely ‘extraordinary’ for the accused to try and do so.

 

[Aldebaran]

So you have absolutely no good reason why one person physically facing another has any relevance?

You've already been told. If you have further questions, study American law.

Testifying is already a terrifying experience for most normal people. Testifying in front of congress and the world’s media, even more so. So on top of that, you think it shouldn’t bother a woman who believe someone tried to rape her, to have to have that same person staring at her as she tries to speak?

You really don’t understand anything about the trauma caused by sexual assault, do you?

It would have been less terrifying to have reported it to the police at the time. If it's so much worse now, then she can always just not do it. No one is forcing her to testify in front of Congress. She was given plenty of options already.

 

[Aldebaran]

Meanwhile the right wing press and supporters are falling over themselves to proclaim her a liar and slander her character at every turn. Because that’s what happens every time a woman accuses a prominent conservative of sexual assault or rape.

Welcome to "trial by media", and it works the same way for both sides.

 

[Kentonio]

You've already been told. If you have further questions, study American law.

No thanks, your ‘Justice system’ is all too often a sick joke.

It would have been less terrifying to have reported it to the police at the time. If it's so much worse now, then she can always just not do it. No one is forcing her to testify in front of Congress. She was given plenty of options already.

So as I said, you don’t understand a single thing about the trauma caused by sexual assault. Thought not.

 

[redleghunter]

People need to understand why women wait. Please watch this video or some perspective. It is short.

Good video. Good for the young lady who clocked the pervert. Sickening that other young men present did not stand up for the young lady. Something like that would have been handled peer to peer back in my day.

Glad the mother reported the school.

 

[Ringo84]

She has asked for more than that, and you know it. She has been offered a chance to accuse Kavanaugh in front of the Senate, and if she wishes the press present, the whole country. Yet instead of jumping at the chance, she insists on extraordinary preconditions. That's as a good as a refusal.

Sam Stein on Twitter

You know the Senate Judiciary Committee doesn't have to let her speak. It would be completely within their authority to tell her that with all due respect, if she believes she has been wronged, the law has a provision for her to file a complaint, and she can make use of that. In the meantime, they have a judicial confirmation to process, and they would like to get on with that. They are under no obligation to abdicate their constitutional authority to CNN.

A few things:
1) They do have to let her speak if they want to get to the truth of what happened
2) Nothing entitles Kavanaugh to a Supreme Court seat
3) Nothing requires the process to be complete before the midterms or in the next week or so
Ringo

 

[TLK Valentine]

So should the standards used in the process of destroying the reputation of someone aspiring to that position. Being tried in the Media isn't a very strict standard.

It's an interesting paradox, isn't it?

When a woman says she's been raped, the default position is that she's right. As soon as she gives a name and says she was raped by ____________, the default position is that she's wrong.

 

[redleghunter]

Ah yes, ‘extraordinary preconditions’ like not having to stare at the man she believes tried to rape her as she gives her account. Yeah, really ‘extraordinary’.

Happens in a court of law every day. I know this in many cases is not emotionally advantageous for an alleged victim, but when charges or accusations are leveled at someone they have a right to be present to hear them and face their accuser.

 

[redleghunter]

Yep, this isn’t a court of law, and even if it was it’s a ridiculous so called right anyway.

It’s a Senate hearing. The accuser and accused will be sworn in. The consequences are perjury.

 

[redleghunter]

Maryland, which has no statute of limitations on felony sexual abuse.

Now, it may very well be that she has no evidence that can stand up in a court, but still wanted this known.

And I thank you for looking that up earlier in the week. Which begs the question why not even now she is not filing a report with the Chevy Chase police or DA. Her lawyer can with a sworn statement.

Maybe she will. Maybe she’s hoping there are other women ready to come forward.

 

[Kentonio]

Happens in a court of law every day. I know this in many cases is not emotionally advantageous for an alleged victim, but when charges or accusations are leveled at someone they have a right to be present to hear them and face their accuser.

Most western countries now allow rape and sexual assault victims to give testimony behind a screen to avoid exactly this kind of intimidation. It’s a huge psychological burden on top of what is already a deeply harrowing and traumatic experience. Someone who has suffered the most intimate of violations then has to stand in court and be cross examined about intimate aspects of their lives by complete strangers, often in an extremely hostile way. So on top of that they should have to do this while their violator stares at them? You don’t see the issue here?

 

[Aldebaran]

No thanks, your ‘Justice system’ is all too often a sick joke.

How does it work in France? Do people go to jail based on the accusation of anonymous people?

So as I said, you don’t understand a single thing about the trauma caused by sexual assault. Thought not.

You can be sympathetic with what someone may have gone through without resorting to the idea that if a person makes a serious enough accusation, we must believe them. That opens the door to plenty of abuse that I doubt you yourself would want to be subjected to by people who want to bring you down and know they can do it with nothing more than an accusation.

 

[Kentonio]

You can be sympathetic with what someone may have gone through without resorting to the idea that if a person makes a serious enough accusation, we must believe them. That opens the door to plenty of abuse that I doubt you yourself would want to be subjected to by people who want to bring you down and know they can do it with nothing more than an accusation.

Absolutely no-one is suggesting an accusation should just be taken at face value. Literally no-one here has said that.

 

[redleghunter]

The Catholic church has paid out millions on account of sexual abuse. Many of those victims have come forward in the 2000s about abuse that happened in the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s.

This is true. And as I mentioned earlier this is happening because multiple accusers are coming forward.

We just may find out on Monday or sooner more women show up in the media claiming Kavanaugh assaulted them.

 

[redleghunter]

Meanwhile the right wing press and supporters are falling over themselves to proclaim her a liar and slander her character at every turn. Because that’s what happens every time a woman accuses a prominent conservative of sexual assault or rape.

Seems to happen when any politician is accused. Did you live through the 90s and see all those women dragged through the mud by Hillary and the press when they accused Bill Clinton?

 

[TLK Valentine]

And I thank you for looking that up earlier in the week. Which begs the question why not even now she is not filing a report with the Chevy Chase police or DA. Her lawyer can with a sworn statement.

Maybe she will. Maybe she’s hoping there are other women ready to come forward.

It's a possibility -- this could be more for her own benefit; many sexual assault victims find a sense of closure in confronting their accusers.

The idea that she's somehow in this for money seems farfetched -- the civil statute of limitations has long since expired.