Members banned from this thread: BRUTALITOPS, USFREEDOM911, Truth Detector, canceled.2021.2 and CFM


Page 1 of 10 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 140

Thread: Corroboration is not required

  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    64,533
    Thanks
    65,160
    Thanked 38,093 Times in 25,664 Posts
    Groans
    5,815
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,498 Posts

    Default Corroboration is not required

    This article explains the tactic of corroboration that's now being used against Dr. Ford.

    "As the Kavanaugh confirmation ploughs through to the full Senate vote, Republicans have articulated a grab-bag of arguments for dismissing Christine Blasey Ford’s sexual assault claim:

    1. It is a vast Clintonian left-wing conspiracy (predictable but ridiculous).
    2. Kavanaugh should not be judged for high school behavior (reasonable but complicated given the seriousness of the allegation and the job).
    3. The incident happened too long ago to be remembered (plausible but rebutted by Ford’s expert-like analysis of her memories).
    4. Kavanaugh is presumed innocent (arguable but this is not a criminal trial and proof, such as victim testimony, rebuts the presumption).

    Judging by the frequency with which it is made, Kavanaugh supporters’ favorite argument is that Ford’s allegations do not count because they are “uncorroborated.”

    Until the late 20th century, sexual offense laws contained a “corroboration requirement” that a rape prosecution could not be proven solely by the word of the victim, no matter how credible. Nowhere else did criminal law presume victims to be dishonest and require independent evidence. The corroboration requirement reflected historically retrogressive and sexist views of women.
    The New York Court of Appeals explained in 1939 that without the rule, “a defendant would be at the mercy of an untruthful, dishonest or vicious complainant.” In 1974, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals — the court Kavanaugh currently sits on — declared that the requirement is necessary because rape complainants “all too frequently” have “an urge to fantasize.”

    Here’s how corroboration historically operated. A rape victim would make a complaint. The accused would deny, deny, deny. Often, the victim had no reason to lie and was credible. She may have told others about the rape. Witnesses may have placed the accused at the scene of the crime. Nevertheless, courts would dismiss the rape charge unless the prosecution presented “independent” evidence such as an eye-witness testimony...

    Sexual assaults generally happen outside of the presence of bystanders — although amazingly not in Ford’s allegation — making eye-witness corroboration impossible. Thus, in the bad old days, corroboration typically came in the form of serious injury. Without a black eye, there was no rape. The requirement of corroboration is a presumption that rape victims lie. That presumption gave way to more reasonable credibility rules. One pertinent rule is that a witness can rebut a charge of recent fabrication with proof of a “prior consistent statement” that predates the motive to lie...

    Kavanaugh supporters repeatedly characterize the statements by the three purported party attendees as “refutations” of Ford’s claims. However, these witnesses did not say, “I remember there was no party.” They said they cannot remember or, more opaquely, have “no knowledge.” In fact, Leland Keyser said she believes Ford. At the present time, these forgetful witnesses are a wash. They do not corroborate Ford or Kavanaugh. Yet, the assumption is that only Ford’s credibility suffers from this lack of corroboration. Nobody mentions that the witnesses provide no alibi for the judge...

    We can debate the science of memory and the effects of trauma and passage of time. We can argue whether we should “ban the box” for Supreme Court nominees. We can talk about the level of proof of wrongdoing required for derailing a nomination. But we should never summarily declare a rape victim’s testimony to be “no proof” because it lacks “corroboration.”

    https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciar...s-not-required


    “What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
    ― Charles Dickens

  2. The Following User Groans At christiefan915 For This Awful Post:

    canceled.2021.3 (10-07-2018)

  3. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to christiefan915 For This Post:

    Cypress (10-07-2018), evince (10-07-2018), kudzu (10-07-2018), Phantasmal (10-07-2018), Rune (10-08-2018), signalmankenneth (10-07-2018), ThatOwlWoman (10-07-2018)

  4. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    24,892
    Thanks
    4,196
    Thanked 15,334 Times in 9,321 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,825 Times in 2,563 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    This article explains the tactic of corroboration that's now being used against Dr. Ford.
    There was no attempt to corroborate anything Ford said, Trump's puppeteers made damn sure the FBI couldn't interview any possible corroborating witnesses

  5. The Following User Groans At reagansghost For This Awful Post:

    canceled.2021.3 (10-07-2018)

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to reagansghost For This Post:

    evince (10-07-2018), ThatOwlWoman (10-07-2018)

  7. #3 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    64,533
    Thanks
    65,160
    Thanked 38,093 Times in 25,664 Posts
    Groans
    5,815
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,498 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reagansghost View Post
    There was no attempt to corroborate anything Ford said, Trump's puppeteers made damn sure the FBI couldn't interview any possible corroborating witnesses
    Exactly. It was all a sham and the RWNJs thought we couldn't see through it.


    “What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
    ― Charles Dickens

  8. The Following User Groans At christiefan915 For This Awful Post:

    canceled.2021.3 (10-07-2018)

  9. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to christiefan915 For This Post:

    evince (10-07-2018), Phantasmal (10-07-2018), ThatOwlWoman (10-07-2018)

  10. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    56,501
    Thanks
    25,106
    Thanked 20,417 Times in 16,406 Posts
    Groans
    129
    Groaned 1,433 Times in 1,355 Posts
    Blog Entries
    7

    Default

    Hang on to all those opinions. That's all you've got....

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to TOP For This Post:

    Life is Golden (10-08-2018)

  12. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    183,528
    Thanks
    71,923
    Thanked 35,503 Times in 27,049 Posts
    Groans
    53
    Groaned 19,565 Times in 18,156 Posts
    Blog Entries
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    Exactly. It was all a sham and the RWNJs thought we couldn't see through it.
    they are sociopaths

  13. The Following 2 Users Groan At evince For This Awful Post:

    canceled.2021.3 (10-07-2018), USFREEDOM911 (10-07-2018)

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to evince For This Post:

    christiefan915 (10-07-2018), ThatOwlWoman (10-07-2018)

  15. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    64,533
    Thanks
    65,160
    Thanked 38,093 Times in 25,664 Posts
    Groans
    5,815
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,498 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TOP View Post
    Hang on to all those opinions. That's all you've got....
    It's the opinion of a law professor who knows more than you.


    “What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
    ― Charles Dickens

  16. The Following User Groans At christiefan915 For This Awful Post:

    canceled.2021.3 (10-07-2018)

  17. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to christiefan915 For This Post:

    evince (10-07-2018), kudzu (10-07-2018), Rune (10-08-2018), ThatOwlWoman (10-07-2018)

  18. #7 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    56,501
    Thanks
    25,106
    Thanked 20,417 Times in 16,406 Posts
    Groans
    129
    Groaned 1,433 Times in 1,355 Posts
    Blog Entries
    7

    Default

    [QUOTE=christiefan915;2647195]It's the opinion of a law professor who knows more than you.[/QUOTE Still Just opinions.... not about Mrs. ford's "story", btw....

  19. #8 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    8,490
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 3,180 Times in 2,409 Posts
    Groans
    376
    Groaned 244 Times in 225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reagansghost View Post
    There was no attempt to corroborate anything Ford said, Trump's puppeteers made damn sure the FBI couldn't interview any possible corroborating witnesses
    That would have been the senior democratic senator from Kalifornia who sat on the story for 3 months to make sure that innuendo was all they had to go on.

  20. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Irish Exit For This Post:

    Lightbringer (10-07-2018), PostmodernProphet (10-07-2018), Red Crow (10-07-2018), Truth Detector (10-07-2018)

  21. #9 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    183,528
    Thanks
    71,923
    Thanked 35,503 Times in 27,049 Posts
    Groans
    53
    Groaned 19,565 Times in 18,156 Posts
    Blog Entries
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kacper View Post
    That would have been the senior democratic senator from Kalifornia who sat on the story for 3 months to make sure that innuendo was all they had to go on.
    dear fucking idiot

    she (unlike you) has morals

    the victim wanted her information withheld

    but you don't care about victims of sex crimes especially if they are not white males


    fuck you very much

  22. The Following 2 Users Groan At evince For This Awful Post:

    canceled.2021.3 (10-07-2018), USFREEDOM911 (10-07-2018)

  23. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to evince For This Post:

    kudzu (10-07-2018), Rune (10-08-2018)

  24. #10 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    34,335
    Thanks
    3,500
    Thanked 11,601 Times in 9,273 Posts
    Groans
    632
    Groaned 1,405 Times in 1,371 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    [QUOTE=TOP;2647209]
    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    It's the opinion of a law professor who knows more than you.[/QUOTE Still Just opinions.... not about Mrs. ford's "story", btw....
    Maybe you could meet Dr Ford at the Red Hen and talk things out!
    AM I, I AM's,AM I.
    What day is Michaelmas on?

  25. The Following User Groans At Mason Michaels For This Awful Post:

    canceled.2021.3 (10-07-2018)

  26. The Following User Says Thank You to Mason Michaels For This Post:

    ThatOwlWoman (10-07-2018)

  27. #11 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    56,501
    Thanks
    25,106
    Thanked 20,417 Times in 16,406 Posts
    Groans
    129
    Groaned 1,433 Times in 1,355 Posts
    Blog Entries
    7

    Default

    Number's disconnected...

  28. #12 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Great State of Texas
    Posts
    1,215
    Thanks
    244
    Thanked 591 Times in 414 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 43 Times in 40 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reagansghost View Post
    There was no attempt to corroborate anything Ford said, Trump's puppeteers made damn sure the FBI couldn't interview any possible corroborating witnesses
    Another post ....

    Another Leftist LIE !!

  29. The Following User Says Thank You to Red Crow For This Post:

    Truth Detector (10-07-2018)

  30. #13 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    14,055
    Thanks
    2,436
    Thanked 8,812 Times in 6,202 Posts
    Groans
    568
    Groaned 493 Times in 469 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    This article explains the tactic of corroboration that's now being used against Dr. Ford.

    "As the Kavanaugh confirmation ploughs through to the full Senate vote, Republicans have articulated a grab-bag of arguments for dismissing Christine Blasey Ford’s sexual assault claim:

    1. It is a vast Clintonian left-wing conspiracy (predictable but ridiculous).
    2. Kavanaugh should not be judged for high school behavior (reasonable but complicated given the seriousness of the allegation and the job).
    3. The incident happened too long ago to be remembered (plausible but rebutted by Ford’s expert-like analysis of her memories).
    4. Kavanaugh is presumed innocent (arguable but this is not a criminal trial and proof, such as victim testimony, rebuts the presumption).

    Judging by the frequency with which it is made, Kavanaugh supporters’ favorite argument is that Ford’s allegations do not count because they are “uncorroborated.”

    Until the late 20th century, sexual offense laws contained a “corroboration requirement” that a rape prosecution could not be proven solely by the word of the victim, no matter how credible. Nowhere else did criminal law presume victims to be dishonest and require independent evidence. The corroboration requirement reflected historically retrogressive and sexist views of women.
    The New York Court of Appeals explained in 1939 that without the rule, “a defendant would be at the mercy of an untruthful, dishonest or vicious complainant.” In 1974, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals — the court Kavanaugh currently sits on — declared that the requirement is necessary because rape complainants “all too frequently” have “an urge to fantasize.”

    Here’s how corroboration historically operated. A rape victim would make a complaint. The accused would deny, deny, deny. Often, the victim had no reason to lie and was credible. She may have told others about the rape. Witnesses may have placed the accused at the scene of the crime. Nevertheless, courts would dismiss the rape charge unless the prosecution presented “independent” evidence such as an eye-witness testimony...

    Sexual assaults generally happen outside of the presence of bystanders — although amazingly not in Ford’s allegation — making eye-witness corroboration impossible. Thus, in the bad old days, corroboration typically came in the form of serious injury. Without a black eye, there was no rape. The requirement of corroboration is a presumption that rape victims lie. That presumption gave way to more reasonable credibility rules. One pertinent rule is that a witness can rebut a charge of recent fabrication with proof of a “prior consistent statement” that predates the motive to lie...

    Kavanaugh supporters repeatedly characterize the statements by the three purported party attendees as “refutations” of Ford’s claims. However, these witnesses did not say, “I remember there was no party.” They said they cannot remember or, more opaquely, have “no knowledge.” In fact, Leland Keyser said she believes Ford. At the present time, these forgetful witnesses are a wash. They do not corroborate Ford or Kavanaugh. Yet, the assumption is that only Ford’s credibility suffers from this lack of corroboration. Nobody mentions that the witnesses provide no alibi for the judge...

    We can debate the science of memory and the effects of trauma and passage of time. We can argue whether we should “ban the box” for Supreme Court nominees. We can talk about the level of proof of wrongdoing required for derailing a nomination. But we should never summarily declare a rape victim’s testimony to be “no proof” because it lacks “corroboration.”

    https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciar...s-not-required
    Sooooo, mere accusation constitutes guilt? Then how are people wrongly convicted, exonerated in the face of DNA evidence? You people are police state tyrants.
    Every life matters

  31. The Following User Says Thank You to countryboy For This Post:

    Truth Detector (10-07-2018)

  32. #14 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    64,533
    Thanks
    65,160
    Thanked 38,093 Times in 25,664 Posts
    Groans
    5,815
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,498 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by countryboy View Post
    Sooooo, mere accusation constitutes guilt? Then how are people wrongly convicted, exonerated in the face of DNA evidence? You people are police state tyrants.
    This is about corroboration, not guilt or innocence. The writer doesn't even imply that accusation constitutes guilt and neither do I. I do realize that Kavanaugh's witnesses did not provide an alibi for him, do you?


    “What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
    ― Charles Dickens

  33. The Following User Groans At christiefan915 For This Awful Post:

    canceled.2021.3 (10-07-2018)

  34. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to christiefan915 For This Post:

    Phantasmal (10-07-2018), ThatOwlWoman (10-07-2018)

  35. #15 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Great State of Texas
    Posts
    1,215
    Thanks
    244
    Thanked 591 Times in 414 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 43 Times in 40 Posts

    Default

    Despite how much the Leftist are squealing over this .....

    Due Process still applies in this Country and the Left cannot derail a SCOTUS nominee with uncorroborated false accusations of sexual assault.

    At least for now.

  36. The Following User Says Thank You to Red Crow For This Post:

    Life is Golden (10-08-2018)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 37
    Last Post: 10-03-2018, 12:21 PM
  2. trumps required physical is near
    By evince in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 01-07-2018, 11:16 AM
  3. APP - This should be required reading
    By canceled.2021.1 in forum Above Plain Politics Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-04-2016, 05:21 AM
  4. Is an ID required?
    By Guns Guns Guns in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 12-30-2011, 05:01 PM
  5. Required Reading for GOP
    By Damocles in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 05-07-2010, 11:06 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •