Ex-Boyfriend Of Third Accuser Had Filed Restraining Order Against Her

[jazzflower92]

Ex-boyfriend filed restraining order against third Kavanaugh accuser

It's from Politico, so it will be more neutral. He even says he questions her credibility.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Interesting.

 

[Tanj]

Ex-boyfriend filed restraining order against third Kavanaugh accuser

It's from Politico, so it will be more neutral. He even says he questions her credibility.

Ahh, the "She was violent to someone else, so cannot be an (attempted) rape victim" defense. Outstanding. Looks like the 1950's are here to stay. I look forward to even more reams of irrelevant dirt that misogynists can proudly point to as evidence of unrape-ability.

Well done jazzflower92, well done.

 

[rambot]

Any chance you noticed how upstanding and respectable that guy is who made that claim?

 

[jazzflower92]

Ahh, the "She was violent to someone else, so cannot be an (attempted) rape victim" defense. Outstanding. Looks like the 1950's are here to stay. I look forward to even more reams of irrelevant dirt that misogynists can proudly point to as evidence of unrape-ability.

Well done jazzflower92, well done.

This was from Politico which is not a right wing rag, so if you are pulling that card then don't. Also why are you invoking the 50's in this, because there some parts of her story that really do not smell well. And

 

[Tanj]

This was from Politico which is not a right wing rag

I care not which part of the bird it's from. You're the one that decided it was forum worthy.

so if you are pulling that card then don't.

I shall point out misogynistic rubbish every time I see it.

Also why are you invoking the 50's in this

It was a reference to a previous post by me in another thread on this topic. The idea that one or more activities in a woman's life somehow makes her unrape-able, an attitude that belongs in the 50's.

because there some parts of her story that really do not smell well.

Then smell them on their merits.

 

[jazzflower92]

I care not which part of the bird it's from. You're the one that decided it was forum worthy.



I shall point out misogynistic rubbish every time I see it.



It was a reference to a previous post by me in another thread on this topic. The idea that one or more activities in a woman's life somehow makes her unrape-able, an attitude that belongs in the 50's.



Then smell them on their merits.

I am going to say if people can record the people in Kavanuagh's life, then they should expect this woman to get recorded to see whether she is really trustworthy as she says. If you put up the sexist card, it really comes off as devaluing the argument. Also it corresponds with more questions about what was a college student doing at a party with high schoolers.

 

[Go Braves]

Any chance you noticed how upstanding and respectable that guy is who made that claim?

Yeah, just read about him in the Miami Herald. He allegedly fraudulently used her resume to apply for and obtain jobs and was caught by her, then tried to flip the tables on her. He didn't show up to court to pursue the claim he made, so it was dropped. He's been married & divorced twice since dating her in the early 2000s.

Meanwhile she's cleared numerous background checks with the US government.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

I shall point out misogynistic rubbish every time I see it.

Just interested in how this is not hypocrisy. First, unproven allegations against this Kavanaugh dude of rape (likely to threaten his credibility, as not raised at the time). But then, when unproven allegations of violenece are raised against the accuser (in turn, likely to challenge her credibility), this is misogyny?

Am I missing something in why you call this "misogynistic rubbish", or is this just a personal bias?

 

[whatbogsends]

Just interested in how this is not hypocrisy. First, unproven allegations against this Kavanaugh dude of rape (likely to threaten his credibility, as not raised at the time). But then, when unproven allegations of violenece are raised against the accuser (in turn, likely to challenge her credibility), this is misogyny?

Am I missing something in why you call this "misogynistic rubbish", or is this just a personal bias?

You really don't see the difference?

In one case, we're talking about the credibility of a man to sit as a judge for the Supreme Court. His character is fully part of the qualifications for that position.

In the other case, we're talking about a woman who has a specific allegation against Judge Kavanaugh. For her, an unrelated incident is being brought up to challenge her credibility as a victim.

Certainly, her credibility should be examined, but simply having had a restraining order placed on her (even if it was justified, as it appears it may not be), doesn't void her claims related to Judge Kavanaugh.

The guy who filed the restraining order (and didn't show up to the hearing) said this (from the OP):

“Right after I broke up with her, she was threatening my family, threatening my wife and threatening to do harm to my baby at that time,” Vinneccy said in a telephone interview with POLITICO. "I know a lot about her.”

So, this upstanding guy who was cheating on his wife filed a restraining order on his mistress. Clearly this is a man of high character and his claim should stand without scrutiny.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

You really don't see the difference?

In one case, we're talking about the credibility of a man to sit as a judge for the Supreme Court. His character is fully part of the qualifications for that position.

So why the allegation today, instead of 20 years or more ago when the rape supposedly happened? If it was a real crime, why wasn't it reported at the time?

In the other case, we're talking about a woman who has a specific allegation against Judge Kavanaugh. For her, an unrelated incident is being brought up to challenge her credibility as a victim.

Alleged victim. The crime was not proven.

Certainly, her credibility should be examined, but simply having had a restraining order placed on her (even if it was justified, as it appears it may not be), doesn't void her claims related to Judge Kavanaugh.

I agree, but both are conveniently timed allegations. Until the jury sits, both parties are and should be treated as innocent.

The guy who filed the restraining order (and didn't show up to the hearing) said this (from the OP):

“Right after I broke up with her, she was threatening my family, threatening my wife and threatening to do harm to my baby at that time,” Vinneccy said in a telephone interview with POLITICO. "I know a lot about her.”

So, this upstanding guy who was cheating on his wife filed a restraining order on his mistress. Clearly this is a man of high character and his claim should stand without scrutiny.

Lol. So the accuser of the accuser of the judge is now of dubious character? Doesn't this show the importance of jury trials, before anyone is treated as guilty?

 

[whatbogsends]

So why the allegation today, instead of 20 years or more ago when the rape supposedly happened? If it was a real crime, why wasn't it reported at the time?

Alleged victim. The crime was not proven.

I agree, but both are conveniently timed allegations. Until the jury sits, both parties are and should be treated as innocent.

Lol. So the accuser of the accuser of the judge is now of dubious character? Doesn't this show the importance of jury trials, before anyone is treated as guilty?

You are correct, alleged victim.

I also agree, that we need an investigation to understand the facts before we can reach any conclusions about the truth.

Do you agree that the character of a Supreme Court Judge/nominee is of significant value? Do you believe that if they are shown to be lying substantively in regards to questions about their history that alone should disqualify them, even if they're not guilty of a criminal charge?

Again, what is being brought up in this thread, with intent to discredit this particular accuser, is that an ex-boyfriend filed a restraining order against her. That restraining order was never granted (he didn't even show up at the hearing), and, the "girlfriend" was actually his mistress.

Swetnick certainly appears to have made some questionable choices about the company she's kept, but without more information, i'm not ready to condemn her credibility based on this fairly weak criticism in the OP.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

You are correct, alleged victim.

I also agree, that we need an investigation to understand the facts before we can reach any conclusions about the truth.

Do you agree that the character of a Supreme Court Judge/nominee is of significant value?

Yes.

Do you believe that if they are shown to be lying substantively in regards to questions about their history that alone should disqualify them, even if they're not guilty of a criminal charge?

If that were true, we'd likely have no Supreme Court Judges, as we're all liars to some degree.

Again, what is being brought up in this thread, with intent to discredit this particular accuser, is that an ex-boyfriend filed a restraining order against her. That restraining order was never granted (he didn't even show up at the hearing), and, the "girlfriend" was actually his mistress.

Swetnick certainly appears to have made some questionable choices about the company she's kept, but without more information, i'm not ready to condemn her credibility based on this fairly weak criticism in the OP.

I thought the purpose was to highlight the folly of entertaining accusations against people (especially accusations made long after the fact), without an appropriate trial. Innocent 'til proven guilty and all that.

 

[Tanj]

Just interested in how this is not hypocrisy.

Well luckily for you I am happy to explain.

First, unproven allegations against this Kavanaugh dude of rape (likely to threaten his credibility, as not raised at the time). But then, when unproven allegations of violenece are raised against the accuser (in turn, likely to challenge her credibility), this is misogyny?

Am I missing something in why you call this "misogynistic rubbish", or is this just a personal bias?

Well yes, yes you are. I've explained it twice already, but I will try for a third time. It's not the allegations of violence which are an issue, it the allegations of violence being used as some kind of counter-evidence to the rape charge. The only thing from this woman's past that could even be remotely relevant is evidence of a pattern of her wrongly accusing people of stuff.

The allegations of violence don't challenge her credibility in any way.

And I'll point out again I don't really care about Kavanaugh one way or the other. I'm not an American, he's not going to affect me in any way. I do care about this victim blaming misogynistic sewer that people insist on swimming in.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

Well luckily for you I am happy to explain.

I did feel lucky, and am grateful for your explanation.

Well yes, yes you are. I've explained it twice already, but I will try for a third time. It's not the allegations of violence which are an issue, it the allegations of violence being used as some kind of counter-evidence to the rape charge. The only thing from this woman's past that could even be remotely relevant is evidence of a pattern of her wrongly accusing people of stuff.

I'm of the view sin begets sin, but I understand where you're coming from.

The allegations of violence don't challenge her credibility in any way.

So then why should allegations of violence (i.e. rape) against Kavanaugh challenge his?

And I'll point out again I don't really care about Kavanaugh one way or the other. I'm not an American, he's not going to affect me in any way. I do care about this victim blaming misogynistic sewer that people insist on swimming in.

Yeah. I don't even know who Kavanaugh is either, other than he can't be all bad if Trump likes him. I'm not sure it's misogyny to accuse an accuser, just because the accused is a woman, but I agree it's a childish game to worry about allegations until a court has heard the evidence.