Have You Heard OF Hillary's Defense of Rapist Thomas Alfred Taylor?

[Fueri]

Hillary Clinton was doing her job as a defense attorney, unless you want to say that rapists don't deserve a fair trial, which is actually an item on the feminist agenda to say that men accused of rape should not get a fair trial.

Doing her job as a defense attorney is one thing, but pulling tricks to get evidence thrown out, attacking the 12 year old, and then laughing about it all later while knowing the man was guilty and then presenting herself as the champion of women and children is despicable.

you've simply bought in to the right wing lies Jim....

Try FACT CHECKING the 'story' the right wing propaganda sites have spun.


Claim: Hillary Clinton successfully defended an accused child rapist and later laughed about the case.

Mixture
WHAT'S TRUE:
-In 1975, young lawyer Hillary Clinton was requested as lawyer for the defense in a rape case involving a 12-year-old girl;
-Clinton reluctantly took on the case, successfully challenged mismanaged evidence, and entered a plea bargain for the defendant.

WHAT'S FALSE:
-Clinton laughed about the unreliable nature of polygraphs, not the case's outcome;

-Clinton did not volunteer to be the man's lawyer;

-Clinton did not claim the complainant fantasized about being raped by older men; the case did not go to trial.

Hillary Clinton Freed Child Rapist, Laughed About it?


Also this link:


Did Hillary Clinton ask to be 'relieved' from representing an accused rapist in 1970s?

She laughed multiple times on that tape, including the polygraph, and going to the judge and declaring the trial a 'miscarriage of justice' she also talks about going to visit a forensics expert who would 'have things come out the way you'd like' I'm paraphrasing there, as I'm not going to bother to go back and listen to it again

girl was raped, in a coma for days and left unable to have children and Hillary absolutely did laugh, multiple times, about how the case was adjudicated. It's on the tape. The fact check article only deals with the laughter about the poly, and there are multiple ways to interpret even that one.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

It is one of the most disgusting cases of twisted law I have ever read, and Hillary laughs about it.

Wow, Clinton Attacked 12-Year Old Rape Victim's Credibility [UPDATED]
Two years into her career of making change and having Day One-readying experience, 27 year old Hillary Rodham was appointed a public defender in a rape case, and played out deep in the gray areas of morality by attacking the 12-year old victim's credibility. Though nobody involved in the case can recall a shred of evidence that the victim had any sort of history of making false claims, Hillary argued it as a centerpiece of her case anyway. And conveniently omitted this aspect of the case from her 2003 book, "Living History."...

The victim was 12 years old. An older man, Thomas Alfred Taylor, was accused of raping her in his car. The man requested a female public defender, which Hillary at first resisted. Once she took the case, however, her defense was aggressive.

In "Living History" and in the Newsday piece, we learn of the issues raised about blood and semen samples, standard criminal defense tactics. But Hillary left out a key piece of the defense.

Newsday explains the omission:

However, that account leaves out a significant aspect of her defense strategy - attempting to impugn the credibility of the victim, according to a Newsday examination of court and investigative files and interviews with witnesses, law enforcement officials and the victim.

Rodham, records show, questioned the sixth grader's honesty and claimed she had made false accusations in the past. She implied that the girl often fantasized and sought out "older men" like Taylor,according to a July 1975 affidavit signed "Hillary D. Rodham" in compact cursive...

But the record shows that Rodham was also intent on questioning the girl's credibility. That line of defense crystallized in a July 28, 1975, affidavit requesting the girl undergo a psychiatric examination at the university's clinic.

"I have been informed that the complainant is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and to engage in fantasizing," wrote Rodham, without referring to the source of that allegation. "I have also been informed that she has in the past made false accusations about persons, claiming they had attacked her body."

Dale Gibson, the investigator, doesn't recall seeing evidence that the girl had fabricated previous attacks. The assistant prosecutor who handled much of the case for Mahlon Gibson died several years ago. The prosecutor's files on the case, which would have included such details, were destroyed more than decade ago when a flood swept through the county archives, Mahlon Gibson said. Those files also would have included the forensics evidence referenced in "Living History."

The victim was visibly stunned when handed the affidavit by a reporter this fall. "It kind of shocks me - it's not true," she said. "I never said anybody attacked my body before, never in my life."

Hillary is scum, but in this particular case she didn't do anything that any other defense lawyer wouldn't have done.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

And I want to make this clear. On two occasions I was tasked with defending men who may or may not have committed statutory rape against a 15-year-old girl. I did my job on both occasions. In the first case, I managed to get the police to drop the case for lack of evidence. In the second case, I plea bargained so that my client was not put on the sex offender registry. I did my job, and someone has to do it.

Every man or woman who is accused of a crime is entitled to the most zealous defense possible. If you don't believe that, then you don't believe in the American system of justice. In fact, you don't believe in any kind of justice, but a police state like they have in most third-world countries where a police accusation is enough to convict, and no real defense is allowed.

Court appointed attorneys are not known for doing much more than filing your paper work for you, ask anyone that has had to deal with them.

What Clinton did was beyond the norm, beyond the pale considering the nature of the offense.

And at the very least she has no right to claim to be a defender of innocent women and children, not at all.

And Trump should use this to trample her reputation in the mud for all eternity and I think he will.

You are LYING..... and are a PAWN.

No he's telling the truth, and you are a brainwashed democrobot.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

It is one of the most disgusting cases of twisted law I have ever read, and Hillary laughs about it.

Wow, Clinton Attacked 12-Year Old Rape Victim's Credibility [UPDATED]
Two years into her career of making change and having Day One-readying experience, 27 year old Hillary Rodham was appointed a public defender in a rape case, and played out deep in the gray areas of morality by attacking the 12-year old victim's credibility. Though nobody involved in the case can recall a shred of evidence that the victim had any sort of history of making false claims, Hillary argued it as a centerpiece of her case anyway. And conveniently omitted this aspect of the case from her 2003 book, "Living History."...

The victim was 12 years old. An older man, Thomas Alfred Taylor, was accused of raping her in his car. The man requested a female public defender, which Hillary at first resisted. Once she took the case, however, her defense was aggressive.

In "Living History" and in the Newsday piece, we learn of the issues raised about blood and semen samples, standard criminal defense tactics. But Hillary left out a key piece of the defense.

Newsday explains the omission:

However, that account leaves out a significant aspect of her defense strategy - attempting to impugn the credibility of the victim, according to a Newsday examination of court and investigative files and interviews with witnesses, law enforcement officials and the victim.

Rodham, records show, questioned the sixth grader's honesty and claimed she had made false accusations in the past. She implied that the girl often fantasized and sought out "older men" like Taylor,according to a July 1975 affidavit signed "Hillary D. Rodham" in compact cursive...

But the record shows that Rodham was also intent on questioning the girl's credibility. That line of defense crystallized in a July 28, 1975, affidavit requesting the girl undergo a psychiatric examination at the university's clinic.

"I have been informed that the complainant is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and to engage in fantasizing," wrote Rodham, without referring to the source of that allegation. "I have also been informed that she has in the past made false accusations about persons, claiming they had attacked her body."

Dale Gibson, the investigator, doesn't recall seeing evidence that the girl had fabricated previous attacks. The assistant prosecutor who handled much of the case for Mahlon Gibson died several years ago. The prosecutor's files on the case, which would have included such details, were destroyed more than decade ago when a flood swept through the county archives, Mahlon Gibson said. Those files also would have included the forensics evidence referenced in "Living History."

The victim was visibly stunned when handed the affidavit by a reporter this fall. "It kind of shocks me - it's not true," she said. "I never said anybody attacked my body before, never in my life."

Hillary is scum, but in this particular case she didn't do anything that any other defense lawyer wouldn't have done.

Except celebrate getting a child rapist off with laughter. How are you any less scummy than Hillary?

 

[charwin95]

Everyone who knows me knows that I am totally against Hillary and I've made that clear over and over. But it is not legitimate to attack her based on this issue. It was her JOB to defend this man, and she DID HER JOB. When you're defending a man accused of rape, you MUST discredit the victim, there is no other way of DOING THE JOB. Unless you think that people accused of crime should be convicted on the word of the police and prosecutor, with no trial.

You would think that Jim and his cronies like SJ have the decency to understand this kind of professions. I know they are not that stupid.

 

[charwin95]

It is one of the most disgusting cases of twisted law I have ever read, and Hillary laughs about it.

Wow, Clinton Attacked 12-Year Old Rape Victim's Credibility [UPDATED]
Two years into her career of making change and having Day One-readying experience, 27 year old Hillary Rodham was appointed a public defender in a rape case, and played out deep in the gray areas of morality by attacking the 12-year old victim's credibility. Though nobody involved in the case can recall a shred of evidence that the victim had any sort of history of making false claims, Hillary argued it as a centerpiece of her case anyway. And conveniently omitted this aspect of the case from her 2003 book, "Living History."...

The victim was 12 years old. An older man, Thomas Alfred Taylor, was accused of raping her in his car. The man requested a female public defender, which Hillary at first resisted. Once she took the case, however, her defense was aggressive.

In "Living History" and in the Newsday piece, we learn of the issues raised about blood and semen samples, standard criminal defense tactics. But Hillary left out a key piece of the defense.

Newsday explains the omission:

However, that account leaves out a significant aspect of her defense strategy - attempting to impugn the credibility of the victim, according to a Newsday examination of court and investigative files and interviews with witnesses, law enforcement officials and the victim.

Rodham, records show, questioned the sixth grader's honesty and claimed she had made false accusations in the past. She implied that the girl often fantasized and sought out "older men" like Taylor,according to a July 1975 affidavit signed "Hillary D. Rodham" in compact cursive...

But the record shows that Rodham was also intent on questioning the girl's credibility. That line of defense crystallized in a July 28, 1975, affidavit requesting the girl undergo a psychiatric examination at the university's clinic.

"I have been informed that the complainant is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and to engage in fantasizing," wrote Rodham, without referring to the source of that allegation. "I have also been informed that she has in the past made false accusations about persons, claiming they had attacked her body."

Dale Gibson, the investigator, doesn't recall seeing evidence that the girl had fabricated previous attacks. The assistant prosecutor who handled much of the case for Mahlon Gibson died several years ago. The prosecutor's files on the case, which would have included such details, were destroyed more than decade ago when a flood swept through the county archives, Mahlon Gibson said. Those files also would have included the forensics evidence referenced in "Living History."

The victim was visibly stunned when handed the affidavit by a reporter this fall. "It kind of shocks me - it's not true," she said. "I never said anybody attacked my body before, never in my life."

Hillary is scum, but in this particular case she didn't do anything that any other defense lawyer wouldn't have done.

Except celebrate getting a child rapist off with laughter. How are you any less scummy than Hillary?

Please read post #15 from black rock to help yourself

 

[2aguy]

Everyone who knows me knows that I am totally against Hillary and I've made that clear over and over. But it is not legitimate to attack her based on this issue. It was her JOB to defend this man, and she DID HER JOB. When you're defending a man accused of rape, you MUST discredit the victim, there is no other way of DOING THE JOB. Unless you think that people accused of crime should be convicted on the word of the police and prosecutor, with no trial.

It is her attitude about the case.....especially in that interview...it was cold, creepy and unserious about a monsterous act.........

 

[bodecea]

It is one of the most disgusting cases of twisted law I have ever read, and Hillary laughs about it.

Wow, Clinton Attacked 12-Year Old Rape Victim's Credibility [UPDATED]
Two years into her career of making change and having Day One-readying experience, 27 year old Hillary Rodham was appointed a public defender in a rape case, and played out deep in the gray areas of morality by attacking the 12-year old victim's credibility. Though nobody involved in the case can recall a shred of evidence that the victim had any sort of history of making false claims, Hillary argued it as a centerpiece of her case anyway. And conveniently omitted this aspect of the case from her 2003 book, "Living History."...

The victim was 12 years old. An older man, Thomas Alfred Taylor, was accused of raping her in his car. The man requested a female public defender, which Hillary at first resisted. Once she took the case, however, her defense was aggressive.

In "Living History" and in the Newsday piece, we learn of the issues raised about blood and semen samples, standard criminal defense tactics. But Hillary left out a key piece of the defense.

Newsday explains the omission:

However, that account leaves out a significant aspect of her defense strategy - attempting to impugn the credibility of the victim, according to a Newsday examination of court and investigative files and interviews with witnesses, law enforcement officials and the victim.

Rodham, records show, questioned the sixth grader's honesty and claimed she had made false accusations in the past. She implied that the girl often fantasized and sought out "older men" like Taylor,according to a July 1975 affidavit signed "Hillary D. Rodham" in compact cursive...

But the record shows that Rodham was also intent on questioning the girl's credibility. That line of defense crystallized in a July 28, 1975, affidavit requesting the girl undergo a psychiatric examination at the university's clinic.

"I have been informed that the complainant is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and to engage in fantasizing," wrote Rodham, without referring to the source of that allegation. "I have also been informed that she has in the past made false accusations about persons, claiming they had attacked her body."

Dale Gibson, the investigator, doesn't recall seeing evidence that the girl had fabricated previous attacks. The assistant prosecutor who handled much of the case for Mahlon Gibson died several years ago. The prosecutor's files on the case, which would have included such details, were destroyed more than decade ago when a flood swept through the county archives, Mahlon Gibson said. Those files also would have included the forensics evidence referenced in "Living History."

The victim was visibly stunned when handed the affidavit by a reporter this fall. "It kind of shocks me - it's not true," she said. "I never said anybody attacked my body before, never in my life."

Several times over the years....this gets dragged out by RWNJs annually. I guess a lawyer isn't supposed to help their client anymore.

 

[bodecea]

Hillary Clinton was doing her job as a defense attorney, unless you want to say that rapists don't deserve a fair trial, which is actually an item on the feminist agenda to say that men accused of rape should not get a fair trial.

Doing her job as a defense attorney is one thing, but pulling tricks to get evidence thrown out, attacking the 12 year old, and then laughing about it all later while knowing the man was guilty and then presenting herself as the champion of women and children is despicable.

"Pulling tricks"? You mean a lawyer working for their client? How would you like if if you needed a lawyer and they didn't work to the best of their ability for you? Or is that somehow......different?

 

[bodecea]

It is one of the most disgusting cases of twisted law I have ever read, and Hillary laughs about it.

Wow, Clinton Attacked 12-Year Old Rape Victim's Credibility [UPDATED]
Two years into her career of making change and having Day One-readying experience, 27 year old Hillary Rodham was appointed a public defender in a rape case, and played out deep in the gray areas of morality by attacking the 12-year old victim's credibility. Though nobody involved in the case can recall a shred of evidence that the victim had any sort of history of making false claims, Hillary argued it as a centerpiece of her case anyway. And conveniently omitted this aspect of the case from her 2003 book, "Living History."...

The victim was 12 years old. An older man, Thomas Alfred Taylor, was accused of raping her in his car. The man requested a female public defender, which Hillary at first resisted. Once she took the case, however, her defense was aggressive.

In "Living History" and in the Newsday piece, we learn of the issues raised about blood and semen samples, standard criminal defense tactics. But Hillary left out a key piece of the defense.

Newsday explains the omission:

However, that account leaves out a significant aspect of her defense strategy - attempting to impugn the credibility of the victim, according to a Newsday examination of court and investigative files and interviews with witnesses, law enforcement officials and the victim.

Rodham, records show, questioned the sixth grader's honesty and claimed she had made false accusations in the past. She implied that the girl often fantasized and sought out "older men" like Taylor,according to a July 1975 affidavit signed "Hillary D. Rodham" in compact cursive...

But the record shows that Rodham was also intent on questioning the girl's credibility. That line of defense crystallized in a July 28, 1975, affidavit requesting the girl undergo a psychiatric examination at the university's clinic.

"I have been informed that the complainant is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and to engage in fantasizing," wrote Rodham, without referring to the source of that allegation. "I have also been informed that she has in the past made false accusations about persons, claiming they had attacked her body."

Dale Gibson, the investigator, doesn't recall seeing evidence that the girl had fabricated previous attacks. The assistant prosecutor who handled much of the case for Mahlon Gibson died several years ago. The prosecutor's files on the case, which would have included such details, were destroyed more than decade ago when a flood swept through the county archives, Mahlon Gibson said. Those files also would have included the forensics evidence referenced in "Living History."

The victim was visibly stunned when handed the affidavit by a reporter this fall. "It kind of shocks me - it's not true," she said. "I never said anybody attacked my body before, never in my life."

Hillary is scum, but in this particular case she didn't do anything that any other defense lawyer wouldn't have done.

Except celebrate getting a child rapist off with laughter. How are you any less scummy than Hillary?

Was that person found guilty?

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Everyone who knows me knows that I am totally against Hillary and I've made that clear over and over. But it is not legitimate to attack her based on this issue. It was her JOB to defend this man, and she DID HER JOB. When you're defending a man accused of rape, you MUST discredit the victim, there is no other way of DOING THE JOB. Unless you think that people accused of crime should be convicted on the word of the police and prosecutor, with no trial.

It is her attitude about the case.....especially in that interview...it was cold, creepy and unserious about a monsterous act.........

As has been noted, she's scum.

But her tactics to get the guy off were legal.

If you want to talk about Hillary's unethical behavior as a lawyer, look into when she was a junior assistant on the Watergate Commission and was tasked to write a brief about having a lawyer present while being questioned by Congress, so she did some research and found out that yes there was a precedent and a lawyer was allowed. Well, she didn't want a lawyer to be allowed. so she removed the evidence of the precedent and hid it and wrote her brief arguing that no such precedent existed.

She was subsequently fired and described as unethical and willing to break the Constitution of the United States.

And that is all factual, and pertinent, information.

 

[S.J.]

Everyone who knows me knows that I am totally against Hillary and I've made that clear over and over. But it is not legitimate to attack her based on this issue. It was her JOB to defend this man, and she DID HER JOB. When you're defending a man accused of rape, you MUST discredit the victim, there is no other way of DOING THE JOB. Unless you think that people accused of crime should be convicted on the word of the police and prosecutor, with no trial.

You would think that Jim and his cronies like SJ have the decency to understand this kind of professions. I know they are not that stupid.

We'll see how your "she just did her job" defense of Hillary's moral integrity works for her when this story becomes a campaign ad before the election.

 

[charwin95]

Everyone who knows me knows that I am totally against Hillary and I've made that clear over and over. But it is not legitimate to attack her based on this issue. It was her JOB to defend this man, and she DID HER JOB. When you're defending a man accused of rape, you MUST discredit the victim, there is no other way of DOING THE JOB. Unless you think that people accused of crime should be convicted on the word of the police and prosecutor, with no trial.

You would think that Jim and his cronies like SJ have the decency to understand this kind of professions. I know they are not that stupid.

We'll see how your "she just did her job" defense of Hillary's moral integrity works for her when this story becomes a campaign ad before the election.

Just wondering why 16 GOPs didn't bother to bring this up.

 

[S.J.]

Everyone who knows me knows that I am totally against Hillary and I've made that clear over and over. But it is not legitimate to attack her based on this issue. It was her JOB to defend this man, and she DID HER JOB. When you're defending a man accused of rape, you MUST discredit the victim, there is no other way of DOING THE JOB. Unless you think that people accused of crime should be convicted on the word of the police and prosecutor, with no trial.

You would think that Jim and his cronies like SJ have the decency to understand this kind of professions. I know they are not that stupid.

We'll see how your "she just did her job" defense of Hillary's moral integrity works for her when this story becomes a campaign ad before the election.

Just wondering why 16 GOPs didn't bother to bring this up.

They're not gonna bring it up before Hillary gets the nomination.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Everyone who knows me knows that I am totally against Hillary and I've made that clear over and over. But it is not legitimate to attack her based on this issue. It was her JOB to defend this man, and she DID HER JOB. When you're defending a man accused of rape, you MUST discredit the victim, there is no other way of DOING THE JOB. Unless you think that people accused of crime should be convicted on the word of the police and prosecutor, with no trial.

You would think that Jim and his cronies like SJ have the decency to understand this kind of professions. I know they are not that stupid.

We'll see how your "she just did her job" defense of Hillary's moral integrity works for her when this story becomes a campaign ad before the election.

Just wondering why 16 GOPs didn't bother to bring this up.

Um because they were in a primary , not the general . You dumb fuck.

 

[charwin95]

Everyone who knows me knows that I am totally against Hillary and I've made that clear over and over. But it is not legitimate to attack her based on this issue. It was her JOB to defend this man, and she DID HER JOB. When you're defending a man accused of rape, you MUST discredit the victim, there is no other way of DOING THE JOB. Unless you think that people accused of crime should be convicted on the word of the police and prosecutor, with no trial.

You would think that Jim and his cronies like SJ have the decency to understand this kind of professions. I know they are not that stupid.

We'll see how your "she just did her job" defense of Hillary's moral integrity works for her when this story becomes a campaign ad before the election.

Just wondering why 16 GOPs didn't bother to bring this up.

Um because they were in a primary , not the general . You dumb fuck.

Only stupid ignorant like you will bring this up. Your Adolf Trump mouth is foaming running out of lies could have brought this up already.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Everyone who knows me knows that I am totally against Hillary and I've made that clear over and over. But it is not legitimate to attack her based on this issue. It was her JOB to defend this man, and she DID HER JOB. When you're defending a man accused of rape, you MUST discredit the victim, there is no other way of DOING THE JOB. Unless you think that people accused of crime should be convicted on the word of the police and prosecutor, with no trial.

You would think that Jim and his cronies like SJ have the decency to understand this kind of professions. I know they are not that stupid.

We'll see how your "she just did her job" defense of Hillary's moral integrity works for her when this story becomes a campaign ad before the election.

Just wondering why 16 GOPs didn't bother to bring this up.

Um because they were in a primary , not the general . You dumb fuck.

Only stupid ignorant like you will bring this up. Your Adolf Trump mouth is foaming running out of lies could have brought this up already.

You have an English version of that tripe handy?

 

[charwin95]

You would think that Jim and his cronies like SJ have the decency to understand this kind of professions. I know they are not that stupid.

We'll see how your "she just did her job" defense of Hillary's moral integrity works for her when this story becomes a campaign ad before the election.

Just wondering why 16 GOPs didn't bother to bring this up.

Um because they were in a primary , not the general . You dumb fuck.

Only stupid ignorant like you will bring this up. Your Adolf Trump mouth is foaming running out of lies could have brought this up already.

You have an English version of that tripe handy?

Let me repeat for you dumb fuck. Only stupid ignorant like you will bring this up. Let me know if you want me to repeat it again.

 

[S.J.]

We'll see how your "she just did her job" defense of Hillary's moral integrity works for her when this story becomes a campaign ad before the election.

Just wondering why 16 GOPs didn't bother to bring this up.

Um because they were in a primary , not the general . You dumb fuck.

Only stupid ignorant like you will bring this up. Your Adolf Trump mouth is foaming running out of lies could have brought this up already.

You have an English version of that tripe handy?

Let me repeat for you dumb fuck. Only stupid ignorant like you will bring this up. Let me know if you want me to repeat it again.

Yeah, one more time. I like watching libs make fools out of themselves.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

We'll see how your "she just did her job" defense of Hillary's moral integrity works for her when this story becomes a campaign ad before the election.

Just wondering why 16 GOPs didn't bother to bring this up.

Um because they were in a primary , not the general . You dumb fuck.

Only stupid ignorant like you will bring this up. Your Adolf Trump mouth is foaming running out of lies could have brought this up already.

You have an English version of that tripe handy?

Let me repeat for you dumb fuck. Only stupid ignorant like you will bring this up. Let me know if you want me to repeat it again.

"RAH Only a stupid idiot will bring up all the wrong things Hillary has done in her scummy life RAH"


shut the fuck up.