Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Interesting criteria you've got there.....think any of that would stand up as valid defense in a court of law?Should we believe a woman accuser when is a
...a filthy ass hate mongering Democrat who is suffering from TDS?
...a woman whose family was judged against by the mother of the person she is accusing?
...a woman who marched around in a pink pussy hat?
...a woman who is a college professor that her students says she is bat shit crazy and vindictive?
...a woman whose brother is linked to Fusion GPS?
I don't think so.
Woman who lied about rape at Michigan college sentenced to jail
'Every district attorney’s nightmare': Two men exonerated in 1991 rape claim
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...-to-falsely-accusing-2-black-m-1826645429/amp
New York woman, 20, who lied about rapes, appears to roll her eyes in court as she's jailed for a year
No Jail Sentence for Woman Who Falsely Claimed Rape by Three Unidentified Black Men
At what point do we start demanding more evidence to prevent lives being destroyed on accusations alone?
How do you determine who to believe and who not to believe unless you begin with a standard of requirements for such accusations to be credible?
Should we always believe women accusers
Their initial accusations most definitely should be taken seriously, not just dismissed.
are you saying that anyone who accuses someone is always right?
These are easy things to validate. Where is the problem ?if she can't say when and where, how does he answer it exactly? he stated he has no idea who she is. is he lying to you? you can't be that fking mental a midget.I would expect those who are appointing him to explore it. Where did it happen,when did it happen, who was there. You may end up against a brick wall but you may exonerate him.how can anyone defend themself thirty five to forty years after something happened? You know there are studies on our memories and what is retained. Hmmmmmm. why do you all avoid that?I am not sure this is something that we need to have any view on until the trial and the evidence is prevented.
Making an accusation is a huge step for a woman to take.
Being accused is a nightmare for any man, especially if he is innocent.
In the UK the accuser is given anonymity but the accuseds name is made public.
The police do it for one reason. They hope to flush out other accusers.
I understand that it is difficult for women to come forward. But it seems that it can be one sided.
I would prefer both parties to be given anonymity until after the trial.
It may deter the very few fake victims.
Now if the incident had been reported, an entirely different ballgame, that means the accused would know about it.
Either way he is up for an important job and needs to be squeaky clean.
You are politically motivated so your opinion is not worth anything.I would expect those who are appointing him to explore it. Where did it happen,when did it happen, who was there. You may end up against a brick wall but you may exonerate him.how can anyone defend themself thirty five to forty years after something happened? You know there are studies on our memories and what is retained. Hmmmmmm. why do you all avoid that?I am not sure this is something that we need to have any view on until the trial and the evidence is prevented.
Making an accusation is a huge step for a woman to take.
Being accused is a nightmare for any man, especially if he is innocent.
In the UK the accuser is given anonymity but the accuseds name is made public.
The police do it for one reason. They hope to flush out other accusers.
I understand that it is difficult for women to come forward. But it seems that it can be one sided.
I would prefer both parties to be given anonymity until after the trial.
It may deter the very few fake victims.
Now if the incident had been reported, an entirely different ballgame, that means the accused would know about it.
Either way he is up for an important job and needs to be squeaky clean.
No, actually, the standard you suddenly want to pretend is normal and required is bullshit.
Unless and until this chick produces ANY sort of substantiation, this has been "explored" as far as it can be, or deserves to be. She's already said she doesn't know where it happened, OR when it happened, and the only two people she remembers as having been there have said it never happened. Unless you have something brilliant to suggest, that IS up against a brick wall, and it's horseshit.
Furthermore, the man is in his early fifties, and his entire adult and professional life have already been investigated to a fare-thee-well, and are "squeaky clean", as you put it. The day anyone on the left suggests that THEIR nominees also be judged on vague accusations about what they might or might not have done as teenagers, you let us know. Of course, I still am not going to think that having been a plaster saint from birth is a necessary, or even a good, requirement for being a Justice.
As it stands, this is so much nothingness and bullshit, it's an insult to the intelligence of the American people to even bring it up, let alone to suggest that it's supposed to be treated as meaningful.
cause you'd know?Considering how rape is a crime of violence and power, not sexual attraction....that isn't what happens....but thanks for showing your colors there, INCEL.What if she's to ugly to rape?Believing them has nothing to do with proving a crime.Aren't we supposed to prove a crime occurred rather than your supposition that we have to prove it didn't?Yes we should believe them until its settled in court or disproven with evidence prior to trial.
How do you disprove a lie? What if you really are innocent but have no alibi because you were home alone at the time of the alleged crime?
You disprove a lie by proving you were never there. She still has to prove you did something to her.
Woman who lied about rape at Michigan college sentenced to jail
'Every district attorney’s nightmare': Two men exonerated in 1991 rape claim
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...-to-falsely-accusing-2-black-m-1826645429/amp
New York woman, 20, who lied about rapes, appears to roll her eyes in court as she's jailed for a year
No Jail Sentence for Woman Who Falsely Claimed Rape by Three Unidentified Black Men
At what point do we start demanding more evidence to prevent lives being destroyed on accusations alone?
How do you determine who to believe and who not to believe unless you begin with a standard of requirements for such accusations to be credible?
Should we always believe women accusers
Their initial accusations most definitely should be taken seriously, not just dismissed.
are you saying that anyone who accuses someone is always right?
No stupid, I'm saying exactly what I wrote. It's not my fault you're unable to comprehend what I wrote.
then why can't she? are you saying that isn't on her to provide? they'd laugh you out of court son.These are easy things to validate. Where is the problem ?if she can't say when and where, how does he answer it exactly? he stated he has no idea who she is. is he lying to you? you can't be that fking mental a midget.I would expect those who are appointing him to explore it. Where did it happen,when did it happen, who was there. You may end up against a brick wall but you may exonerate him.how can anyone defend themself thirty five to forty years after something happened? You know there are studies on our memories and what is retained. Hmmmmmm. why do you all avoid that?I am not sure this is something that we need to have any view on until the trial and the evidence is prevented.
Making an accusation is a huge step for a woman to take.
Being accused is a nightmare for any man, especially if he is innocent.
In the UK the accuser is given anonymity but the accuseds name is made public.
The police do it for one reason. They hope to flush out other accusers.
I understand that it is difficult for women to come forward. But it seems that it can be one sided.
I would prefer both parties to be given anonymity until after the trial.
It may deter the very few fake victims.
Now if the incident had been reported, an entirely different ballgame, that means the accused would know about it.
Either way he is up for an important job and needs to be squeaky clean.
Easy for the police to do so,not so easy for member of the public. Why are you so defensive on this issue ? It isnt difficult to establish a time and place for events in your past. I did it myself a while back when I had a conversation with an old school mate. All sorts of things can help to verify.These are easy things to validate. Where is the problem ?if she can't say when and where, how does he answer it exactly? he stated he has no idea who she is. is he lying to you? you can't be that fking mental a midget.I would expect those who are appointing him to explore it. Where did it happen,when did it happen, who was there. You may end up against a brick wall but you may exonerate him.how can anyone defend themself thirty five to forty years after something happened? You know there are studies on our memories and what is retained. Hmmmmmm. why do you all avoid that?I am not sure this is something that we need to have any view on until the trial and the evidence is prevented.
Making an accusation is a huge step for a woman to take.
Being accused is a nightmare for any man, especially if he is innocent.
In the UK the accuser is given anonymity but the accuseds name is made public.
The police do it for one reason. They hope to flush out other accusers.
I understand that it is difficult for women to come forward. But it seems that it can be one sided.
I would prefer both parties to be given anonymity until after the trial.
It may deter the very few fake victims.
Now if the incident had been reported, an entirely different ballgame, that means the accused would know about it.
Either way he is up for an important job and needs to be squeaky clean.
No, they are not easy things to validate. If they were, SHE would have already done so. That would be the problem.
Folks, can't you hear a judge saying to a defendant, why don't you provide the details of the incident the accuser just accused you of, she can't remember.then why can't she? are you saying that isn't on her to provide? they'd laugh you out of court son.These are easy things to validate. Where is the problem ?if she can't say when and where, how does he answer it exactly? he stated he has no idea who she is. is he lying to you? you can't be that fking mental a midget.I would expect those who are appointing him to explore it. Where did it happen,when did it happen, who was there. You may end up against a brick wall but you may exonerate him.how can anyone defend themself thirty five to forty years after something happened? You know there are studies on our memories and what is retained. Hmmmmmm. why do you all avoid that?I am not sure this is something that we need to have any view on until the trial and the evidence is prevented.
Making an accusation is a huge step for a woman to take.
Being accused is a nightmare for any man, especially if he is innocent.
In the UK the accuser is given anonymity but the accuseds name is made public.
The police do it for one reason. They hope to flush out other accusers.
I understand that it is difficult for women to come forward. But it seems that it can be one sided.
I would prefer both parties to be given anonymity until after the trial.
It may deter the very few fake victims.
Now if the incident had been reported, an entirely different ballgame, that means the accused would know about it.
Either way he is up for an important job and needs to be squeaky clean.
dude, what the fk? if nothing was reported, how does the police find out what happened? you thinking the police are following you? ohhhh boi.Easy for the police to do so,not so easy for member of the public. Why are you so defensive on this issue ? It isnt difficult to establish a time and place for events in your past. I did it myself a while back when I had a conversation with an old school mate. All sorts of things can help to verify.These are easy things to validate. Where is the problem ?if she can't say when and where, how does he answer it exactly? he stated he has no idea who she is. is he lying to you? you can't be that fking mental a midget.I would expect those who are appointing him to explore it. Where did it happen,when did it happen, who was there. You may end up against a brick wall but you may exonerate him.how can anyone defend themself thirty five to forty years after something happened? You know there are studies on our memories and what is retained. Hmmmmmm. why do you all avoid that?
Now if the incident had been reported, an entirely different ballgame, that means the accused would know about it.
Either way he is up for an important job and needs to be squeaky clean.
No, they are not easy things to validate. If they were, SHE would have already done so. That would be the problem.
Its possible that Kavanaugh wasnt even in the country when she said it happened. I think it would be worth checking out the story.
Heres a thought, they could interview her and the judge. I really sense that you are keen not to know about what,if anything, happened.dude, what the fk? if nothing was reported, how does the police find out what happened? you thinking the police are following you? ohhhh boi.Easy for the police to do so,not so easy for member of the public. Why are you so defensive on this issue ? It isnt difficult to establish a time and place for events in your past. I did it myself a while back when I had a conversation with an old school mate. All sorts of things can help to verify.These are easy things to validate. Where is the problem ?if she can't say when and where, how does he answer it exactly? he stated he has no idea who she is. is he lying to you? you can't be that fking mental a midget.I would expect those who are appointing him to explore it. Where did it happen,when did it happen, who was there. You may end up against a brick wall but you may exonerate him.
Either way he is up for an important job and needs to be squeaky clean.
No, they are not easy things to validate. If they were, SHE would have already done so. That would be the problem.
Its possible that Kavanaugh wasnt even in the country when she said it happened. I think it would be worth checking out the story.
why does he need to be involved exactly? it's her claim, she makes a claim and then backs it up. time and place. it isn't his responsibility he owes her shit. again, try and do that in court with a judge. dude they'd be making emojis out of you.Heres a thought, they could interview her and the judge. I really sense that you are keen not to know about what,if anything, happened.dude, what the fk? if nothing was reported, how does the police find out what happened? you thinking the police are following you? ohhhh boi.Easy for the police to do so,not so easy for member of the public. Why are you so defensive on this issue ? It isnt difficult to establish a time and place for events in your past. I did it myself a while back when I had a conversation with an old school mate. All sorts of things can help to verify.These are easy things to validate. Where is the problem ?if she can't say when and where, how does he answer it exactly? he stated he has no idea who she is. is he lying to you? you can't be that fking mental a midget.
No, they are not easy things to validate. If they were, SHE would have already done so. That would be the problem.
Its possible that Kavanaugh wasnt even in the country when she said it happened. I think it would be worth checking out the story.
what's sad is your fking serious.
Why would he not co-operate ? I would have thought that he would be happy to do so .why does he need to be involved exactly? it's her claim, she makes a claim and then backs it up. time and place. it isn't his responsibility he owes her shit. again, try and do that in court with a judge. dude they'd be making emojis out of you.Heres a thought, they could interview her and the judge. I really sense that you are keen not to know about what,if anything, happened.dude, what the fk? if nothing was reported, how does the police find out what happened? you thinking the police are following you? ohhhh boi.Easy for the police to do so,not so easy for member of the public. Why are you so defensive on this issue ? It isnt difficult to establish a time and place for events in your past. I did it myself a while back when I had a conversation with an old school mate. All sorts of things can help to verify.These are easy things to validate. Where is the problem ?
No, they are not easy things to validate. If they were, SHE would have already done so. That would be the problem.
Its possible that Kavanaugh wasnt even in the country when she said it happened. I think it would be worth checking out the story.
again, your honor, my client can't recall the date and place, can the defendant tell her that information?
maybe all defendants should just plead guilty and we wouldn't need judges eh?
why would he cooperate? you're fking serious?Why would he not co-operate ? I would have thought that he would be happy to do so .why does he need to be involved exactly? it's her claim, she makes a claim and then backs it up. time and place. it isn't his responsibility he owes her shit. again, try and do that in court with a judge. dude they'd be making emojis out of you.Heres a thought, they could interview her and the judge. I really sense that you are keen not to know about what,if anything, happened.dude, what the fk? if nothing was reported, how does the police find out what happened? you thinking the police are following you? ohhhh boi.Easy for the police to do so,not so easy for member of the public. Why are you so defensive on this issue ? It isnt difficult to establish a time and place for events in your past. I did it myself a while back when I had a conversation with an old school mate. All sorts of things can help to verify.No, they are not easy things to validate. If they were, SHE would have already done so. That would be the problem.
Its possible that Kavanaugh wasnt even in the country when she said it happened. I think it would be worth checking out the story.
again, your honor, my client can't recall the date and place, can the defendant tell her that information?
maybe all defendants should just plead guilty and we wouldn't need judges eh?
Easy for the police to do so,not so easy for member of the public. Why are you so defensive on this issue ? It isnt difficult to establish a time and place for events in your past. I did it myself a while back when I had a conversation with an old school mate. All sorts of things can help to verify.These are easy things to validate. Where is the problem ?if she can't say when and where, how does he answer it exactly? he stated he has no idea who she is. is he lying to you? you can't be that fking mental a midget.I would expect those who are appointing him to explore it. Where did it happen,when did it happen, who was there. You may end up against a brick wall but you may exonerate him.how can anyone defend themself thirty five to forty years after something happened? You know there are studies on our memories and what is retained. Hmmmmmm. why do you all avoid that?
Now if the incident had been reported, an entirely different ballgame, that means the accused would know about it.
Either way he is up for an important job and needs to be squeaky clean.
No, they are not easy things to validate. If they were, SHE would have already done so. That would be the problem.
Its possible that Kavanaugh wasnt even in the country when she said it happened. I think it would be worth checking out the story.
Heres a thought, they could interview her and the judge. I really sense that you are keen not to know about what,if anything, happened.dude, what the fk? if nothing was reported, how does the police find out what happened? you thinking the police are following you? ohhhh boi.Easy for the police to do so,not so easy for member of the public. Why are you so defensive on this issue ? It isnt difficult to establish a time and place for events in your past. I did it myself a while back when I had a conversation with an old school mate. All sorts of things can help to verify.These are easy things to validate. Where is the problem ?if she can't say when and where, how does he answer it exactly? he stated he has no idea who she is. is he lying to you? you can't be that fking mental a midget.
No, they are not easy things to validate. If they were, SHE would have already done so. That would be the problem.
Its possible that Kavanaugh wasnt even in the country when she said it happened. I think it would be worth checking out the story.
Why would he not co-operate ? I would have thought that he would be happy to do so .why does he need to be involved exactly? it's her claim, she makes a claim and then backs it up. time and place. it isn't his responsibility he owes her shit. again, try and do that in court with a judge. dude they'd be making emojis out of you.Heres a thought, they could interview her and the judge. I really sense that you are keen not to know about what,if anything, happened.dude, what the fk? if nothing was reported, how does the police find out what happened? you thinking the police are following you? ohhhh boi.Easy for the police to do so,not so easy for member of the public. Why are you so defensive on this issue ? It isnt difficult to establish a time and place for events in your past. I did it myself a while back when I had a conversation with an old school mate. All sorts of things can help to verify.No, they are not easy things to validate. If they were, SHE would have already done so. That would be the problem.
Its possible that Kavanaugh wasnt even in the country when she said it happened. I think it would be worth checking out the story.
again, your honor, my client can't recall the date and place, can the defendant tell her that information?
maybe all defendants should just plead guilty and we wouldn't need judges eh?
You have a closed mind and are not worth discussing it with.Easy for the police to do so,not so easy for member of the public. Why are you so defensive on this issue ? It isnt difficult to establish a time and place for events in your past. I did it myself a while back when I had a conversation with an old school mate. All sorts of things can help to verify.These are easy things to validate. Where is the problem ?if she can't say when and where, how does he answer it exactly? he stated he has no idea who she is. is he lying to you? you can't be that fking mental a midget.I would expect those who are appointing him to explore it. Where did it happen,when did it happen, who was there. You may end up against a brick wall but you may exonerate him.
Either way he is up for an important job and needs to be squeaky clean.
No, they are not easy things to validate. If they were, SHE would have already done so. That would be the problem.
Its possible that Kavanaugh wasnt even in the country when she said it happened. I think it would be worth checking out the story.
Easy for the police to validate something that happened over 30 years ago and was never reported to them, or even mentioned to anyone? How do you figure they're gonna do that at all, let alone that it's going to be easy, you retard? The police aren't psychic. If they are, then they aren't getting paid enough.
And please do not flatter yourself by instantly leaping to, "Aha! They're annoyed! That means they're defensive because I'm touching a nerve!" I'm allergic to stupid, and you're enough to produce anaphylactic shock at this point. Take your brain out of the shrink wrap, plug it in, and USE it for the first time in your life.
It is INCREDIBLY difficult to "establish a time and place" for 30 years ago, especially when the person making the accusation has no idea about any of it. You say, "When she said it happened." Well, when was that, precisely? Her letter just said, "In high school, late 1980s". How terribly specific. "Some house, don't know whose, or where, or how I got there". Damn, should be able to validate THAT in an afternoon, with time left over for a round of golf.
Next time, try knowing something before you attempt to think.
You have a closed mind and are not worth discussing it with.Easy for the police to do so,not so easy for member of the public. Why are you so defensive on this issue ? It isnt difficult to establish a time and place for events in your past. I did it myself a while back when I had a conversation with an old school mate. All sorts of things can help to verify.These are easy things to validate. Where is the problem ?if she can't say when and where, how does he answer it exactly? he stated he has no idea who she is. is he lying to you? you can't be that fking mental a midget.
No, they are not easy things to validate. If they were, SHE would have already done so. That would be the problem.
Its possible that Kavanaugh wasnt even in the country when she said it happened. I think it would be worth checking out the story.
Easy for the police to validate something that happened over 30 years ago and was never reported to them, or even mentioned to anyone? How do you figure they're gonna do that at all, let alone that it's going to be easy, you retard? The police aren't psychic. If they are, then they aren't getting paid enough.
And please do not flatter yourself by instantly leaping to, "Aha! They're annoyed! That means they're defensive because I'm touching a nerve!" I'm allergic to stupid, and you're enough to produce anaphylactic shock at this point. Take your brain out of the shrink wrap, plug it in, and USE it for the first time in your life.
It is INCREDIBLY difficult to "establish a time and place" for 30 years ago, especially when the person making the accusation has no idea about any of it. You say, "When she said it happened." Well, when was that, precisely? Her letter just said, "In high school, late 1980s". How terribly specific. "Some house, don't know whose, or where, or how I got there". Damn, should be able to validate THAT in an afternoon, with time left over for a round of golf.
Next time, try knowing something before you attempt to think.
Has no idea of any of that?Easy for the police to do so,not so easy for member of the public. Why are you so defensive on this issue ? It isnt difficult to establish a time and place for events in your past. I did it myself a while back when I had a conversation with an old school mate. All sorts of things can help to verify.These are easy things to validate. Where is the problem ?if she can't say when and where, how does he answer it exactly? he stated he has no idea who she is. is he lying to you? you can't be that fking mental a midget.I would expect those who are appointing him to explore it. Where did it happen,when did it happen, who was there. You may end up against a brick wall but you may exonerate him.
Either way he is up for an important job and needs to be squeaky clean.
No, they are not easy things to validate. If they were, SHE would have already done so. That would be the problem.
Its possible that Kavanaugh wasnt even in the country when she said it happened. I think it would be worth checking out the story.
Easy for the police to validate something that happened over 30 years ago and was never reported to them, or even mentioned to anyone? How do you figure they're gonna do that at all, let alone that it's going to be easy, you retard? The police aren't psychic. If they are, then they aren't getting paid enough.
And please do not flatter yourself by instantly leaping to, "Aha! They're annoyed! That means they're defensive because I'm touching a nerve!" I'm allergic to stupid, and you're enough to produce anaphylactic shock at this point. Take your brain out of the shrink wrap, plug it in, and USE it for the first time in your life.
It is INCREDIBLY difficult to "establish a time and place" for 30 years ago, especially when the person making the accusation has no idea about any of it. You say, "When she said it happened." Well, when was that, precisely? Her letter just said, "In high school, late 1980s". How terribly specific. "Some house, don't know whose, or where, or how I got there". Damn, should be able to validate THAT in an afternoon, with time left over for a round of golf.
Next time, try knowing something before you attempt to think.
