[Thanos]

All of which was explained quite clearly in the article. Direct witnesses to an assault are not always needed for a conviction, any more that it's come to the point that video evidence of a crime is an absolute must for a conviction. The credibility of the accuser is often more than enough in a court to win a conviction if the credibility of the accused is lacking. I've done jury duty before and this is exactly how we based our decision when we found the accused to be guilty. The witnesses that testified, the evidence the police gathered, and the case presented by the Crown prosecutor were all credible. The testimony of the accused and the case their lawyer made weren't credible. That was all we needed to make our decision. We did our duty according to the law and as jurors we had the absolute right to make that decision based on what we saw of the characters of the opponents in the trial.

You guys are also missing something incredibly important here in the continuous misuse going on in this thread of the concept of innocent until proven guilty. Kavanaugh isn't ever going to be taken to court of what he was accused of doing thirty-six years ago - the statue of limitations says specifically that he can't be tried for something that happened that long ago. But the fact that the accusation never went, or ever will, go to court doesn't mean the Senate or the American people have to accept Kavanaugh as being fit to serve on SCOTUS. They can make that decision based on nothing more than what they've seen of his character as well as what they know of his politics and of the ideology of the people who are supporting him. And they have the absolute right to use that accusation as a determining factor for his ethical and moral fitness to serve on the bench. There are myriad reasons why Kavanaugh is unacceptable to serve on SCOTUS - the accusation of sexual assault is merely one of those reasons. Just because the accusation never went, and never will, go to trial doesn't mean it didn't happen.

[N_Fiddledog]

Thanos Thanos:

All of which was explained quite clearly in the article.

Was it though?

I clicked his link where he claimed to explain it. It was like this:

$1:

I rob you on a dark, deserted street at night. You call the police. You describe me. The police find me. You confirm it was me. You testify against me. I go to jail. This sort of thing is completely normal.

That may have happened at some time in some jurisdiction to somebody with the wrong record or the the wrong look for that area at that time.

In fact, didn't something like that happen to the boxer, Hurricane Carter? It was struck down on appeal much later as I recall.

If the writer is saying it happens all the time to people like Judge Kavanaugh who have a rep and access to high grade legal counsel though your writer is full of shit or he doesn't have a clue what he talking about.

The rest of your post is victim of similar lazy thinking. Pick the point you like the best and I'll show you what I mean if you like.

[Coach85]

Thanos Thanos:

All of which was explained quite clearly in the article. Direct witnesses to an assault are not always needed for a conviction, any more that it's come to the point that video evidence of a crime is an absolute must for a conviction. The credibility of the accuser is often more than enough in a court to win a conviction if the credibility of the accused is lacking. I've done jury duty before and this is exactly how we based our decision when we found the accused to be guilty. The witnesses that testified, the evidence the police gathered, and the case presented by the Crown prosecutor were all credible. The testimony of the accused and the case their lawyer made weren't credible. That was all we needed to make our decision. We did our duty according to the law and as jurors we had the absolute right to make that decision based on what we saw of the characters of the opponents in the trial.

I'll say it again. That's total BS.

What your experience was and this case aren't even comparable. Not even in the same ballpark! You had evidence from police and witnesses and likely, a case that didn't take place 30 years ago.

What you and the article is trying to tell us that uncorroborated testimony from a victim is often enough to convict people. It's a absolute lie.


I'll ask you again since you missed it the first time.

Why do you care about this case?

What does the appointment of this man have anything to do with your life?

TBH, 99.99% of the people that have a problem with Kavanaugh are anti-Trump. I have zero time for Agent Orange but I can see through the bullshit and see this for what it is. People trying to get 'one up' on Trump.

[Thanos]

All the people who were willing to volunteer to testify about Kavanaugh's behaviour at college weren't allowed to talk to the FBI investigation because of the direct orders of the White House. Preventing that corroboration from being made know is enough to show that the Trump admin knows that Blasey-Ford annihilated Kavanaugh's credibility altogether and that they'd have to resort to their usual obstruction-of-justice tactics to get him pushed through the Senate confirmation process.

And if you think that having someone like Kavanaugh, who openly believes that a president is totally immune from any legal ramifications for any crime he committed before becoming president and (even worse) while he's sitting in office, sitting on the Supreme Court that could very well likely someday hear that kind of case being made in front of them against Trump, then you are out to lunch. This would be the shattering of the Constitutional limitations on the powers and privileges of a president and in essence end up transforming the office into the equivalent of an anything-goes unaccountable monarch. You don't see the danger in that then the blinders you've got on is truly impenetrable to any kind of light getting through at all.

Don't say you're against Trump if you're willing to let this one go because the potentially catastrophic ramifications and consequences of someone with Kavanaugh's personality and beliefs getting on the SCOTUS are incalculable.

[N_Fiddledog]

Blasey Ford made allegations about something she claimed happened 35 years ago and couldn't get anybody to corroborate. In fact the witnesses she did offer say it didn't happen.

That's all she offered. If you know of something else produce it. The fact some clip you saw of her making allegations impressed you is not impressive as evidence.

If an allegation was enough to convict somebody you wouldn't need trials.

The most you have concerning Ford's allegations at the Kavanaugh confirmation hearing is "He said, she said." That's being generous.

There's a ton of reasons to believe that woman is not credible. Most of them have been catalogued here but we can go through them again if you like.

[Thanos]

I'm not interested in the slightest in anything anyone on the Trump team has to say. I know what kind of people they are. THEY know what kind of people they are, and what they're doing, and what goals they're working towards. I won't give them any legitimacy by listening to any of the sewage they're perpetually spewing out.

This, all of this, is an existential battle for basic survival, and it extends beyond the borders of the United States and out into the entire world, just because of the truly rotten and genuinely evil character & personality of Donald Trump (and what he wants to do) is a danger to everything everywhere. No peace or compromise is possible with this regime, it's followers, it's abettors, or any of the disgusting orcs in it's inner workings.

[N_Fiddledog]

Yeah, I noticed that preferred ignorance thing. You were impressed by Blasey-Ford's testimony but didn't seem to notice Kavanaugh also testified. I watched them both. I was less impressed by Blasey-Ford's than you were. I found Kavanaugh justifiably fiery and sincere.

More importantly though I listened to both sides' support for their arguments. At least I tried. Blasey-Ford didn't seem to have any that would stand up to scrutiny.

[Tricks]

Coach85 Coach85:

Thanos, FWIW, your article lost me at:

$1:

Put simply, a victim’s uncorroborated credible testimony often suffices for a criminal conviction.

This it total bullshit.

Uncorroborated testimony from 30+ years ago RARELY suffices for a criminal conviction. Add on the inconsistencies in the stores, the lack of knowledge of the events.

And, even if it is sufficient to a jury, it shouldn't be.

[BRAH]

_________________

[N_Fiddledog]

[N_Fiddledog]

Check it out. See if that impersonator isn't dead-on:

[Coach85]

Anyone notice that Thanos specifically dodged my question on two separate occasions?

[Freakinoldguy]

I don't know if this has been posted yet but if it has it's still worth revisiting. If anyone thinks the Democrats are going to take Kavanaugh's appointment or Trumps election lying down they're going to be extremely disappointed. This appears to be an escalating campaign of doxing by low level Democrat flunky's who when caught can take the fall without compromising their patrons. The only question how many of them will have to go to jail before these Senators stop or these perps decide jail time isn't worth doxing someone.

$1:

Washington • U.S. Capitol Police announced late Wednesday that a former junior Senate Democratic staffer has been arrested for allegedly posting private information about Republican senators, including Utah’s Orrin Hatch and Mike Lee, on Wikipedia.

Jackson Cosko, 27, of Washington, D.C., faces five federal counts including making public restricted personal information, making threats in interstate communications, identity theft, witness tampering and unauthorized access of a government computer, police said.

Cosko also faces District charges of second degree burglary and unlawful entry, police said. He is set to appear before U.S. Magistrate Deborah Robinson of the District of Columbia on Thursday afternoon, the U.S. attorney's office for the District, said.

"The investigation will continue and additional charges may be forthcoming," Capitol Police spokeswoman Eva Malecki said.

Cosko could not immediately be reached for comment.

A brief police statement did not give details, but a U.S. official said the arrest was tied to the investigation into the posting of personal information about Republican senators on the Wikipedia site as they held a hearing Sept. 27 on sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

At the time, Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., rejected accusations that a member of her staff was responsible, calling them "lies, lies, and more despicable lies."

The information posted purportedly included phone numbers and home addresses for three Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee at the hearing: Hatch, Lee and Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.

It could not be immediately determined if Cosko had any past connection to Waters' office. The office did not immediately respond to a request for comment late Wednesday.

https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/20 ... atic-aide/

[BeaverFever]

Coach85 Coach85:

Anyone notice that Thanos specifically dodged my question on two separate occasions?

I’ve been staying out of this because

A) it’s pointless-Republicans have the majority and are highly partisan so this whole exercise is pointless. There could be video tape of him raping her and they would still confirm him.

B) Although I’m willing to believe that the accusations are probably true, they are not actionable. The accusations are decades old, there was no police report at the time, the accusation is of “attempted” rape not actual, and he was a minor at the time. I’m not saying any of that excuses anything but none of the above facts are amenable to Republican logic on sexual assault.

He’s going to get confirmed. Period

As to your question of why should anyone care about Kavanaugh. The answer is that he somehow believes presidents are above the law and cannot be prosecuted for wrongdoing. So trump wants him in the bench as insurance against the various investigations and lawsuits into his many wrongdoings.

[BRAH]

The Left's last Hail Mary failed, it's over.