Should we always believe women accusers?

[2aguy]

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?

Legal insurrection looks at her claims...especially the "repressed memory" aspect of her claims...


Kavanaugh Accuser's couples therapy records, partially leaked to WaPo, may hold the key

First, there was a suggestion that this is a repressed and recovered memory case:

“Years later, after going through psychotherapy, Ford said, she came to understand the incident as a trauma with lasting impact on her life.”

If this is a case of repressed memory, then it changes everything. It’s a convenient explanation for why Ford said nothing to anyone for 30 years despite herself being a clinical psychologist. Repressed and recovered memory, however, is of questionable veracity and admissibility in court.

Second, that repressed memory allegedly was recovered in 2012 during couples’ therapy,

Ford said she told no one of the incident in any detail until 2012, when she was in couples therapy with her husband.

Why in couples therapy, not in individual therapy? That seems like an odd time to recover memory, particularly for a clinical psychologist who likely underwent or practiced various forms of psychological therapy during her long career. This suggests that perhaps there was some marital problem which implicated an earlier trauma, if this story is true, or invented an earlier trauma as an excuse, if the story is not true.

Third, Ford volunteered the therapist’s notes to WaPo, but only selective portions chosen by Ford:

The therapist’s notes, portions of which were provided by Ford and reviewed by The Washington Post, do not mention Kavanaugh’s name but say she reported that she was attacked by students “from an elitist boys’ school” who went on to become “highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington.” The notes say four boys were involved, a discrepancy Ford says was an error on the therapist’s part. Ford said there were four boys at the party but only two in the room.

It seems odd for an alleged sexual assault victim to volunteer psychiatric records, particularly since the odious “nuts and sluts” defense so frequently is used against accusers. And why were only selective portions shared? This seems particularly calculating and defensively preemptive.

My gut tells me the therapy records hold a key to what did or did not happen here. Having voluntarily shared a part of those records with a newspaper, it’s hard for Ford to argue confidentiality.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.

Here is a thought. Interview her under oath. Let's see how long her story sticks.

There's nothing to interrogate her ABOUT, or for her to stick TO.

Even her much-vaunted polygraph only asked her if they had correctly stated the story she gave them, not whether or not the allegations were true.

The entire thing is so much smoke blown up people's asses in an attempt to do through character assassination what the Democrats couldn't do through actually winning elections.

She has made a serious accusation. Now let her restate that accusation and answer questions to that accusation under oath with a heavy reminder that to lie under oath is a federal crime. She will be required to provide proof of her accusation.

Then let's see what she has to say.

Yeah, the problem is that her story is so vague, and so utterly unprovable one way or the other, that there's no way really to nail her down to perjury on it unless she's dumb enough to either change it or start trying to embellish it with the details she's so lacking at the moment.

Gee, that would be a shame...

Insofar as we'd be spending a lot of time and public effort on it, AND further trashing the reputation of a man who may not have done anything at all, for absolutely no resolution either way, it WOULD be a shame.

 

[2aguy]

Andrew McCarthy says this is a set-up.........
Brett Kavanaugh Allegations: It’s a Set-up | National Review

Instead, the vote was delayed to provide Ford an opportunity to testify. This was wholly unnecessary under the circumstances, but the committee went the extra mile in order to exhibit sensitivity to Ford’s alleged trauma. Rather than accept, however, Ford’s partisan Democratic lawyers countered that there must be an investigation first — never mind that the committee hearing is an investigation of the only thing that matters: how the Senate should exercise its constitutional advice-and-consent duty.




Four points, to state the obvious.

First, in no case does even the most sympathetic, convincing victim of a crime get to dictate the terms of the investigation.

Second, in any sexual-assault investigation, an interview of the alleged victim is among the first things that must be done. Here, moreover, it would be the first thing, since after 36 years a forensic investigation is not possible. Because the alleged victim’s version of events would dictate the course of the rest of the investigation, it would be absurd to delay an interview.


Third, as long as Ford’s counsel want to talk about regular, independent investigations, we should note that there is not a police organization in America that would entertain her allegation, in light of the lapse of time and the long-ago exhaustion of the statute of limitations. Professional investigators understand only too well the inherent unreliability of allegations raised in the manner Ford’s have been raised. The only relevance of this alleged incident is to a Senate function, so it is for the Senate committee to decide how to proceed.

Fourth, as Ford’s lawyers well know, in our adversary system, we do not submit disputes to a team of independent expert investigators. We have advocates for each side — partisans — make the case as well as it can be from their side’s perspective, and we let the other side attack with all its partisan might. We allow each side to examine the other’s witnesses. Based on this often heated clash, we expect that members of the public will be able to figure out what information is reliable, what is nonsense, and what the truth is. That is the process we use for deciding life-and-death criminal sentences, as well as civil judgments that can be financially ruinous. We have used it for centuries because it works.

It is fashionable throat-clearing at this point to offer some vertiginous, ostentatiously sympathetic twaddle about how Professor Ford is credible in the sense that she truly believes what she has claimed, yet mistaken about . . . well . . . everything that matters. Sorry, I’m a simple man. What’s happening here is pure BS.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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?

more than 90% of sexual assault claims turn out to be true

Which is supposed to mean what? That the falsely accused in the 10% should give up any expectation of having their rights protected?

 

[Cecilie1200]

No, they are not easy things to validate. If they were, SHE would have already done so. That would be the problem.

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.
Its possible that Kavanaugh wasnt even in the country when she said it happened. I think it would be worth checking out the story.

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.

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.

Here is a thought. Interview her under oath. Let's see how long her story sticks.

Yes.Its not difficult is it ?
A lot of people seem very keen to not open the box. The police already have plenty to go on. Not least is the fact that the principals are all still alive.

The police have jack shit to go on. If you really think there's any basis for an investigation here, I would politely suggest that you should stop watching so much TV.

And since she has already said she refuses to testify before the committee, my personal inclination at this point is to say, "Well, if it really means that little to you, then it obviously is not worth our time, so piss off, and we're going on with our lives."

She is not remotely behaving like the victim she claims to be, and I get less impressed with the importance and veracity of this every day.

 

[sealybobo]

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?

Yes, always. Guilty till proven innocent

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.
Its possible that Kavanaugh wasnt even in the country when she said it happened. I think it would be worth checking out the story.

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.

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.

Here is a thought. Interview her under oath. Let's see how long her story sticks.

Yes.Its not difficult is it ?
A lot of people seem very keen to not open the box. The police already have plenty to go on. Not least is the fact that the principals are all still alive.

The police are not and should not be involved at all

The statute of limitations for any charges expired long ago this is no longer a matter for either the police or the courts

And it never was a matter for the FBI, no matter how much leftists seem to think they're some Supercop organization that's a hybrid between Sherlock Holmes and Minority Report.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Yes we should believe them until its settled in court or disproven with evidence prior to trial.

No we should be entirely skeptical about both the accuser and the accused until evidence is presented to a court and the matter is settled to the satisfaction of law.

Believing one or the other before the outcome of a trial contradicts the innocent until proven guilty edict our legal system operates under therefore all judgement of the veracity of both parties has to be avoided until after the trial

It's less a matter of believing Kavanaugh over Ford than it is that 1) Ford has given us very little TO believe one way or the other, 2) Brett Kavanaugh has just gotten done being vetted so thoroughly in regards to his entire adult/professional life that it was just shy of a televised colonoscopy, and 3) everyone involved with Ford's accusation has behaved in an incredibly suspicious and shifty manner.

I'm going to say honestly that, given the nature of the accusations, the way they're being made, and the time frame in which the incident happened, I really don't see anything here that I need to give a crap about in the context of his Supreme Court nomination. Sorry, but I just don't. And no, this has nothing to do with "partisanship", since I don't care all that much about the Republican Party per se, and I was never an enthusiastic fan of Brett Kavanaugh's nomination. He was actually third or fourth in my preferences from the judges on Trump's short list.

again, if the lady believes she was mistreated at 15, then her parents are at fault. why does a 15 year end up at a 17 year old's home if that is what happened. the fact she can't remember the key information of the supposed incident, then there is absolutely no way she remembers names. none. it isn't logical at all. AT ALL. ask any professional.

Well, I can tell you that I was a teenager at more or less the same time Kavanaugh and Ford were. And I can assure you that if someone were to come forward now and make vague accusations about something I did at an unspecified drunken teenaged party, my response would be more or less what Kavanaugh's was: I know it didn't happen, because I didn't GO to any drunken teenaged parties. So there's that.

Also, having been a 15-year-old girl at one time - and during the same time period Ford was - I'm finding her story of being traumatized by this for decades and the characterizations of it as "attempted rape" to be a bit overblown and hyperbolic. I had my share of awkward, boorish gropings from adolescent clods and sleazeballs back in the day, VERY similar to this story, and not only wouldn't have labeled them anything so serious and dramatic as "attempted rape", but frankly only barely remember them at this point in life. Not to say it wasn't awful and unacceptable behavior, but . . . no.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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?

Legal insurrection looks at her claims...especially the "repressed memory" aspect of her claims...


Kavanaugh Accuser's couples therapy records, partially leaked to WaPo, may hold the key

First, there was a suggestion that this is a repressed and recovered memory case:

“Years later, after going through psychotherapy, Ford said, she came to understand the incident as a trauma with lasting impact on her life.”

If this is a case of repressed memory, then it changes everything. It’s a convenient explanation for why Ford said nothing to anyone for 30 years despite herself being a clinical psychologist. Repressed and recovered memory, however, is of questionable veracity and admissibility in court.

Second, that repressed memory allegedly was recovered in 2012 during couples’ therapy,

Ford said she told no one of the incident in any detail until 2012, when she was in couples therapy with her husband.

Why in couples therapy, not in individual therapy? That seems like an odd time to recover memory, particularly for a clinical psychologist who likely underwent or practiced various forms of psychological therapy during her long career. This suggests that perhaps there was some marital problem which implicated an earlier trauma, if this story is true, or invented an earlier trauma as an excuse, if the story is not true.

Third, Ford volunteered the therapist’s notes to WaPo, but only selective portions chosen by Ford:

The therapist’s notes, portions of which were provided by Ford and reviewed by The Washington Post, do not mention Kavanaugh’s name but say she reported that she was attacked by students “from an elitist boys’ school” who went on to become “highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington.” The notes say four boys were involved, a discrepancy Ford says was an error on the therapist’s part. Ford said there were four boys at the party but only two in the room.

It seems odd for an alleged sexual assault victim to volunteer psychiatric records, particularly since the odious “nuts and sluts” defense so frequently is used against accusers. And why were only selective portions shared? This seems particularly calculating and defensively preemptive.

My gut tells me the therapy records hold a key to what did or did not happen here. Having voluntarily shared a part of those records with a newspaper, it’s hard for Ford to argue confidentiality.

I'm really having trouble believing this as a "repressed memory". More like a forgotten memory, the way most things that are unpleasant but not really that frigging important are forgotten.

Sorry, but the incident as she describes it just wasn't that awful and traumatic, unless she's just too emotionally fragile to live.

 

[WillMunny]

If the accuser is liberal then I automatically don't believe a word they say about anything. I've caught so many liberals in so many lies about so many things for so many years, I flat-out refuse to believe anything from a mouth that has a muslim dick in it.