A lawyer accuses Justice Clarence Thomas of groping in 1999 while she was a student

christiefan915

Catalyst
Contributor
On Thursday, the National Law Journal and Washington Post relayed an account from an Alaska attorney who accuses Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas of groping her and grabbing her butt in 1999. Moira Smith, who was a 23-year-old student at the time, met Thomas (who was confirmed to SCOTUS in 1991) at a dinner for Truman Foundation scholars. Thomas has called the claims "preposterous."

The National Law Journal notes that Smith originally made the allegations a few weeks ago on her private Facebook page (which she since deactivated): "He groped me while I was setting the table, suggesting I should sit 'right next to him.'" Smith reportedly wrote the post while reacting to the stream of women coming forward to lodge similar accusations against Donald Trump. While the publication hasn't spoken to Smith, they talked to three of her friends who wished to corroborate her version of the story. Reporter Marcia Coyle wrote the following:

"[Smith's] three former housemates during the spring and summer of 1999 each said in interviews they remembered Smith describing inappropriate contact by Thomas after she came home that night from the dinner or early the next morning," Coyle wrote.

"They also remembered their own shock and inability to advise her about how to respond. Another Truman scholar that summer, whom Smith would later marry and divorce, said in an interview he 'definitely remembered' her sharing with him what had happened soon after the dinner party.

The Washington Post also published the above statements, along with those of other attendees at the party, who don't recall witnessing the alleged incident. For his part, Thomas insists that the allegations are "preposterous and [it] never happened."

In 1991, Thomas become the focus of controversy when Oklahoma University law professor Anita Hill accused him of sexual harassment in the 1980s while he was her boss at the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission. A few weeks ago, Hill penned an op-ed in the Boston Globe, in which she condemned how Trump bragged about sexual assault in 2005 hot-mic footage.

http://www.aol.com/article/news/201...rence-thomas-of-groping-her-in-1999/21593467/
 
Ahhhh....it was only a matter of time.....17 years as a matter of fact....Anita Hill didn't even accuse him of that did she ?
 
Long long history in this country of white women falsely accusing black men of sexual misconduct. I can't speak to whether that's the case here but knowing that history does it come in to play?
 
Long long history in this country of white women falsely accusing black men of sexual misconduct. I can't speak to whether that's the case here but knowing that history does it come in to play?

My question is why should we believe Bill Clinton's accusers but not Trump's and Thomas's? Nothing to do with black or white.
 
Moira-Smith-Facebook-Article-201610271221.jpg
 
My question is why should we believe Bill Clinton's accusers but not Trump's and Thomas's? Nothing to do with black or white.

good point. I assign them some weight ( individual basis) but other then that I don't simply believe anyone because of what my politics wants me to believe..There seems to be a new standard that women must be beleived - and didn't Clinton say as much?
(forgive my ignorance i only hear these references in passing unless it jams up the media for days.)

It seem that we used to purposely NOT believe women's accusations - they were dismissed as "bimbos"- and rich and powerful men colluded to undermine rapes/sex charges.
Which was wrong,and unjust.

But haven't we gone too far the other way, where an accusation is a conviction in the media, and damning to the point of a conviction in peoples minds ?
 
My question is why should we believe Bill Clinton's accusers but not Trump's and Thomas's? Nothing to do with black or white.

good point. I assign them some weight ( individual basis) but other then that I don't simply believe anyone because of what my politics wants me to believe..There seems to be a new standard that women must be beleived - and didn't Clinton say as much?

(forgive my ignorance i only hear these references in passing unless it jams up the media for days.)

It seem that we used to purposely NOT believe women's accusations - they were dismissed as "bimbos"- and rich and powerful men colluded to undermine rapes/sex charges. Which was wrong,and unjust.

But haven't we gone too far the other way, where an accusation is a conviction in the media,
and damning to the point of a sure conviction in peoples minds ?
 
LOL the last part of her letter reads like a humblebrag. Can you imagine what the underprivileged peasants must go through?
 
Long long history in this country of white women falsely accusing black men of sexual misconduct. I can't speak to whether that's the case here but knowing that history does it come in to play?

What the fuck? NO. Every accusation should be taken seriously regardless of history.
 
Back
Top