canceled.2021.3 (10-07-2018)
Members banned from this thread: BRUTALITOPS, USFREEDOM911, Truth Detector, canceled.2021.2 and CFM |
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:
- It is a vast Clintonian left-wing conspiracy (predictable but ridiculous).
- Kavanaugh should not be judged for high school behavior (reasonable but complicated given the seriousness of the allegation and the job).
- The incident happened too long ago to be remembered (plausible but rebutted by Ford’s expert-like analysis of her memories).
- 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
canceled.2021.3 (10-07-2018)
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)
canceled.2021.3 (10-07-2018)
evince (10-07-2018), ThatOwlWoman (10-07-2018)
canceled.2021.3 (10-07-2018)
evince (10-07-2018), Phantasmal (10-07-2018), ThatOwlWoman (10-07-2018)
Hang on to all those opinions. That's all you've got....
Life is Golden (10-08-2018)
canceled.2021.3 (10-07-2018), USFREEDOM911 (10-07-2018)
christiefan915 (10-07-2018), ThatOwlWoman (10-07-2018)
canceled.2021.3 (10-07-2018)
evince (10-07-2018), kudzu (10-07-2018), Rune (10-08-2018), ThatOwlWoman (10-07-2018)
[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....
Lightbringer (10-07-2018), PostmodernProphet (10-07-2018), Red Crow (10-07-2018), Truth Detector (10-07-2018)
canceled.2021.3 (10-07-2018), USFREEDOM911 (10-07-2018)
canceled.2021.3 (10-07-2018)
ThatOwlWoman (10-07-2018)
Number's disconnected...
Truth Detector (10-07-2018)
Truth Detector (10-07-2018)
“What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
― Charles Dickens
canceled.2021.3 (10-07-2018)
Phantasmal (10-07-2018), ThatOwlWoman (10-07-2018)
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.
Life is Golden (10-08-2018)
Bookmarks