Kavanaugh accused of sexually assaulting classmate in high school

[Torie]

If I were in charge of the show, I think the next step for me would be to request declarations from both parties as to what happened or didn't signed under penalty of perjury.

[Torie]

There is definitely enough evidence to show that Kavanaugh is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and that he would be convicted if he faced a criminal trial.

Do you really believe that? One minor procedural detail, is that nobody has said anything under oath.

[Torie]

I don't think it right to tar and feather someone for something that they did of this genre when age 17, decades later. The problem is a matter of Kavanaugh's candor now however. And the rule of evidence here should be more likely than not, not beyond a reasonable doubt. It seems that if this nomination moves forward (because K claims it is all a tissue of lies), then it looks like we will have full fledged hearings on this under oath (because the accuser's lawyer says that she is ready and willing to do that). I think that is essential at this point. Anita Hill all over again. It should be great for TV ratings. I suspect the odds are more than insignificant that the nomination will be withdrawn. We shall see.

[Torie]

I don't think it right to tar and feather someone for something that they did of this genre when age 17, decades later. The problem is a matter of Kavanaugh's candor now however. And the rule of evidence here should be more likely than not, not beyond a reasonable doubt. It seems that if this nomination moves forward (because K claims it is all a tissue of lies), then it looks like we will have full fledged hearings on this under oath (because the accuser's lawyer says that she is ready and willing to do that). I think that is essential at this point. Anita Hill all over again. It should be great for TV ratings. I suspect the odds are more than insignificant that the nomination will be withdrawn. We shall see.

If his nomination is rescinded, the GOP will get crucified at the polls by the base.

I don't think so, because K will have asked that his nomination be withdrawn. He will need to be prepared to testify on this under oath however if he goes forward, unless perhaps the accuser falls apart when she testifies.

[Torie]

Maybe this will turn out to the be the "Duke Lacrosse" case of the #MeToo movement.

(That is, assuming that CBF's allegations will continue to fail under increased scrutiny).

CBF allegations are robustly holding up to increased scrutiny.

I don't know what there is to hold up given 1) no corroborating evidence to support her allegations and 2) possible motives for Ford to want to discredit Kavanaugh and prevent him from taking a seat on the Court.

Maybe this will turn out to the be the "Duke Lacrosse" case of the #MeToo movement.

(That is, assuming that CBF's allegations will continue to fail under increased scrutiny).

? Nothing has been disproven in her testimony yet. Im pretty sure you just think that they dont hold up.

Under increased scrutiny, the inconsistences in her allegations,  the lack of evidence to support her allegations, and her possible motives in wanting to discredit Kavanaugh are all becoming more widely known.

The context surrounding Ford's story clearly is evidence. Its corroborating evidence is that she told her therapist 6 years ago. That therapist made notes, & could testify if asked to do so.  What we have right now is enough for a Senator to vote no, b/c the evidentiary standard for SCOTUS nominees isn't "beyond a reasonable doubt". It's a lifetime SCOTUS seat; a whiff of impropriety should be too much. Even if your point is absent corroboration, just stop (for all intents & purposes) insulting & ignoring this accusation just b/c it doesn't fit your political preference (as Democrats mostly did re: Al Franken & Republicans mostly failed to do re: Roy Moore).

Brett Kavanaugh is never indicated as the assailant in the therapist's notes, so I fail to see the notes as corroborating evidence to Ford's allegations.

How a senator should vote on this matter is really a political issue and not a moral one.  There are no evidentiary standards for these types of allegations concerning a SCOTUS nomination, so the Republican majority is free to take them with a grain of salt (as they should, because there's no evidence corroborating them).

I'm not insulting or ignoring an allegation.  The allegation would be very serious and the withdrawal of Kavanaugh's nomination would be warranted if there was more corroborating evidence to support Ford's testimony.  The allegations regarding Roy Moore and Al Franken were much more substantiated than these.  

What if it is established that they were at the same party? Do the notes from 2012 indicate when the sexual assault is supposed to have occurred? If say, in reality there was an assault, but it was by someone else at another venue around this time, but yes, both were at the same party, and the accuser uses that coincidence to go after K, that is certainly a lot of bad luck for K. If it was by someone else at the same party, that is really bad luck.  

Someone posted that the notes say four were involved, but elsewhere it was two. Which is it? If four, does anyone know the other two names?

[Torie]

Well K still says it is all BS, and is willing to testify, so game on. He's not withdrawing.

[Torie]

Donald Jr must be mistaking real life for an internet forum

You made me laugh Virginia. Thank you. I have not been laughing much lately.

[Torie]

Here is what I think is a thoughtful analysis of the situation. This author agrees with me on the more likely than not standard of proof. Absent more evidence, how the two come across when they testify would be a key factor perhaps in tipping the balance one way or the other. I would think they would want the therapist to testify too, along with the other identified individual that was accused, particularly if both K and Ford seem credible with their contradictory testimony.

[Torie]

Under Maryland State law, he could still be prosecuted for (attempted) rape and sent to jail if state officials would be willing to prosecute him, because there is no statue of limitations for (attempted) rape in Maryland. I already sent a letter to Brian Frosh asking him to launch a prosecution, and have been trying to get other people to send similar letters.

Kavanaugh is clearly guilty, and would be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt if the case got to the courtroom.

First,  a claim the something happened 35 years ago, refuted by a witnessed, where the documentation shows that the the the accuser's story changed, would be tossed out in a preliminary, if a prosecutor were stupid enough to file.  There would need to be more.

Second, it might make a difference, even if proven, that he was a juvenile.

 it might not apply to a juvenile.

JJ, for the love of God stop embarrassing yourself. Speaking is a long time criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor who apparently understand the facts case far far better than you, you are officially talking out of your ass.

Bager, you may be a "former" prosecutor for a good reason.  Think Mike Nifong, another "former prosecutor." 

Someone "claiming" they were attack would not be enough to get a conviction, especially unverified. 

Enough of this personal back and forth. Thank you.

[Torie]

I don't get why they haven't invited the other alleged assaulter and the therapist to testify too.

[Torie]

I don't get why they haven't invited the other alleged assaulter and the therapist to testify too.

Republicans don't have an interest in turning this into a spectacle. All they need to do is placate 50/51 Republicans, so what Feinstein or Durbin or Hirono wants doesn't matter whatsoever.

Well, maybe, but isn't there an upside for the Pubs? The second accused denies it all, and the therapist could be asked if she thinks that the four versus two was a typo, or that she was told four, and whether K's name came up, and what the description of the perp was, and so forth. There would be a a particular upside if the Dems are not really pushing for it, because at least as to the therapist, they might have been in contact.

[Torie]

Who locked this thread? I can see that it might be deemed better to not have two threads discussing the same matter, when the nomination is now largely about the alleged assault, but it would be good to have a note about it somewhere.

[Torie]

Wasn't me.

Do we want to merge this thread into a new one, so that we gain control of the thread? Do we want two threads to remain with respect to K is the question.