Author Topic: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?  (Read 13481 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 273,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,242
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« on: September 30, 2018, 11:52:51 »
I've been following the Kavanaugh hearings for a seat on the USSC and have been noting various senators comments respecting the lack of corroboration respecting Professor Ford's allegations. Usually these come with comments that she was a credible witness.

This made me wonder about the requirement for corroborative evidence (or even "recent complaint) in sexual assault (or rape) allegations in the US because that doesn't exist in Canada anymore.

Quote
Corroboration not required

274 If an accused is charged with an offence under section 151, 152, 153, 153.1, 155, 159, 160, 170, 171, 172, 173, 271, 272, 273, 286.1, 286.2 or 286.3, no corroboration is required for a conviction and the judge shall not instruct the jury that it is unsafe to find the accused guilty in the absence of corroboration.

R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 274; R.S., 1985, c. 19 (3rd Supp.), s. 11; 2002, c. 13, s. 12; 2014, c. 25, s. 16.
Previous Version
Marginal note:Rules respecting recent complaint abrogated

275 The rules relating to evidence of recent complaint are hereby abrogated with respect to offences under sections 151, 152, 153, 153.1, 155 and 159, subsections 160(2) and (3) and sections 170, 171, 172, 173, 271, 272 and 273.

R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 275; R.S., 1985, c. 19 (3rd Supp.), s. 11; 2002, c. 13, s. 12.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-64.html#docCont

My research brought me to this article in the US and the following quotation:

Quote
Today, the corroboration requirement has virtually disappeared from the modern
rape law.
According to George Fisher, “No American jurisdiction retains a general
corroboration requirement in rape cases. Georgia abolished the last remaining
statutory rule in 1978 . . . and, Nebraska the last remaining common law rule in
1989.”46 As recently as 2004, Michelle Anderson reported that Ohio is one of only
three jurisdictions retaining the corroboration requirement in any of its sexual offense
provisions.47 Deborah Denno noted that even the drafters of the Model Penal Code
“acknowledged the controversy surrounding the rule in the 1970s and stressed that
attitudes toward the doctrine were increasingly in a state of flux.”48 Many legal
scholars have credited feminist critiques of the corroboration requirement as being
largely responsible for its demise. These critics emphasized that no other crime
required the victim to meet special credibility standards, 49 that the corroboration
requirement operated as a barrier to the successful prosecution of sexual offenses,50
and, finally, that no empirical evidence existed to support the notion that women make
a large number of false rape accusations (i.e., that “ladies lie”).51

https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1786&context=fac_articles

That begs the question why Republican senators feel that believing Dr Ford isn't sufficient and that there needs to be something more in the way of corroboration when the law doesn't require it?

Maybe Kavanaugh's express lies about his "legal drinking age" and the meaning of "boofing" and "devil's triangle" while under oath will be sufficient to make them doubt his character.

http://time.com/5409564/brett-kavanaugh-drinking-age-maryland/

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/28/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-fact-check.html

Thoughts?

 :cheers:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Online Blackadder1916

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 235,995
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,332
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #1 on: September 30, 2018, 12:18:36 »

Thoughts?


The legal requirement to have or not have corroboration would be an issue if the confirmation hearings and eventual Senate vote were a criminal proceeding (or trial of any sort).  Unfortunately, it is not, so the rules of evidence don't apply.  And, judging from the refusal to hold any hearings for Judge Merrick Garland, neither do accepted rules of common decency or, arguably, constitutional requirements.

Those senators (mostly Republican) likely don't give a toss about whether or not Dr. Ford was sexually assaulted by Judge Kavanaugh or if the nominee was a booze addled sexual predator in his youth.  If they could say "it was a phase he went through and is no longer that person" and not have to face the wrath of voters (well, those that would disagree with such an attitude), there would probably be one or two knuckle draggers who would.
Whisky for the gentlemen that like it. And for the gentlemen that don't like it - Whisky.

Offline Bird_Gunner45

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 52,741
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,115
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #2 on: September 30, 2018, 12:28:48 »
I've been following the Kavanaugh hearings for a seat on the USSC and have been noting various senators comments respecting the lack of corroboration respecting Professor Ford's allegations. Usually these come with comments that she was a credible witness.

This made me wonder about the requirement for corroborative evidence (or even "recent complaint) in sexual assault (or rape) allegations in the US because that doesn't exist in Canada anymore.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-64.html#docCont

My research brought me to this article in the US and the following quotation:

https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1786&context=fac_articles

That begs the question why Republican senators feel that believing Dr Ford isn't sufficient and that there needs to be something more in the way of corroboration when the law doesn't require it?

Maybe Kavanaugh's express lies about his "legal drinking age" and the meaning of "boofing" and "devil's triangle" while under oath will be sufficient to make them doubt his character.

http://time.com/5409564/brett-kavanaugh-drinking-age-maryland/

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/28/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-fact-check.html

Thoughts?

 :cheers:

I think the most damning aspect of this event is that many have used the "it was 30 years ago" or "he was young and made a mistake" excuse to justify his nomination. This is a very very poor precedent, particularly when discussing a nomination for the supreme court. If the witnesses are deemed credible (and based on their credentials and their testimony it is reasonable to say they're credible) than how can republicans justify his nomination? surely there must be another conservative nomination that could be passed through without sacrificing their political futures....

The reality for most sexual assault victims is that (if you believe statistics) only 6 of every 1000 are reported, with only 3 convictions from those 6. The key issue is generally that rape/sexual assault is by its nature a "he said/she said" event as generally they don't occur in front of people. So, the question is always how do you maintain the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty with the singular nature of the crime and support victims rights? That's the crux of the Cavanaugh debate. IMHO, this should force his nomination from the top court of the land, at least until the facts can be proven in court.

Finally, there's the question of the independence of the supreme court as an institution. How does the court prove itself to be anything other than a partisan tool of either party if you have a judge on it who holds even the stigma of impropriety at best or the belief among a significant portion of the population that they're a sex offender at best?

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 167,035
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,300
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #3 on: September 30, 2018, 13:45:17 »
The legal requirement to have or not have corroboration would be an issue if the confirmation hearings and eventual Senate vote were a criminal proceeding (or trial of any sort).  Unfortunately, it is not, so the rules of evidence don't apply.  And, judging from the refusal to hold any hearings for Judge Merrick Garland, neither do accepted rules of common decency or, arguably, constitutional requirements.

Those senators (mostly Republican) likely don't give a toss about whether or not Dr. Ford was sexually assaulted by Judge Kavanaugh or if the nominee was a booze addled sexual predator in his youth.  If they could say "it was a phase he went through and is no longer that person" and not have to face the wrath of voters (well, those that would disagree with such an attitude), there would probably be one or two knuckle draggers who would.

Is the evidence of the numerous women who stood up for him any less valid using the same test?

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 350,711
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,163
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #4 on: September 30, 2018, 13:58:44 »
I've been watching this a little and it seems like a huge train wreck.

Ford seems like a huge train wreck herself. I'm not sure if she's normally a wreck of a woman or if her defense team made a point of making her appear as homely as they could. I'm not saying that to be a dick, I think she's being used and abused by the democrats.

Tons of inconsistency with her defense. Sure she was super emotional, I guess to many that equals credibility. But if I'm not mistaken the 3 or 4 witnesses she had all basically denied Kavanaugh's culpability.

It's scary at how many Americans seem willing to forget or ignore lack of evidence and proof. Trying to pick him apart for being angry at being called a rapist and having his life turned upside down is hilariously delusional.

Sen. Graham's rant on Ford's Kavanaugh testimony says it all.

It's all delay tactics to try and block Trump from filling that seat.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 553,655
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,693
    • The job.
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #5 on: September 30, 2018, 14:24:20 »
Delaying a lifetime appointment to the US Supreme Court for seven days? I'm shocked! < sarcasm  :)

The Republicans delayed Merrick Garland's nomination for 293 days.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland

« Last Edit: September 30, 2018, 15:20:08 by mariomike »

Offline reverse_engineer

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 66,025
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,666
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #6 on: September 30, 2018, 14:46:03 »
I've been watching this a little and it seems like a huge train wreck.

Ford seems like a huge train wreck herself. I'm not sure if she's normally a wreck of a woman or if her defense team made a point of making her appear as homely as they could. I'm not saying that to be a dick, I think she's being used and abused by the democrats.

Tons of inconsistency with her defense. Sure she was super emotional, I guess to many that equals credibility. But if I'm not mistaken the 3 or 4 witnesses she had all basically denied Kavanaugh's culpability.

It's scary at how many Americans seem willing to forget or ignore lack of evidence and proof. Trying to pick him apart for being angry at being called a rapist and having his life turned upside down is hilariously delusional.

Sen. Graham's rant on Ford's Kavanaugh testimony says it all.

It's all delay tactics to try and block Trump from filling that seat.

I agree that the timing and circumstances for this are a bit suspect. Not to mention, he will now always be guilty in the court of public opinion.

With that said, sexual assault/sex crimes are horrible things (anyone that's had to investigate/deal with them in their careers can attest) that don't ever leave the mind and need to be taken very seriously.

Unfortunately it's a subject where there is never truly justice for victims, or for the wrongly accused.

Offline Old Sweat

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 226,655
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,932
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #7 on: September 30, 2018, 16:30:55 »
I heard a commentator, on Fox and very proTrump, claim Doctor Ford's recall was based on regression therapy, which according to a number of sources is a dubious methodology. I don't know if this is true or not, and she deserves the benefit of the doubt. Maybe this is a smear, but who knows?

Remember back in the 1990s there was a spate of charges and convictions for child sexual abuse based on something called recovered memory syndrome. It was later determined the incidents were planted by the therapists and did not occur.

I am not being judgemental and would just as soon that the regression therapy played no part in this. However, I don't know, and the recovered memory rush to judgement made me suspicious of long past incidents suddenly being asserted as fact.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2018, 16:34:22 by Old Sweat »

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 121,875
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,468
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #8 on: September 30, 2018, 17:11:19 »
In the US we have a statute of limitations. The FBI now has begun to investigate these 36 year old allegations. The Democrats are doing everything to derail this nomination.

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -7995.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 282,737
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,676
    • Army.ca
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #9 on: September 30, 2018, 18:12:44 »
In the US we have a statute of limitations. The FBI now has begun to investigate these 36 year old allegations. The Democrats are doing everything to derail this nomination.
.........and one can only wonder at the hullabaloo had this been a democrat and the POTUS was democrat and the GOP trotted out a whole bunch of dubious accusers and smear campaigns in order to subvert the process. The fact that none of this was revealed when the democrats approved his nomination to the federal court, very quickly, is totally suspect in itself.

The FBI has a week, then they can give the GOP Senate a chance to bypass the committee and blow up the filibuster. The sooner the better.

Meanwhile, it's a good thing our PM isn't open to hearings like this. However, then again, why not?
Corruption in politics doesn't scare me.
What scares me is how comfortable people are doing nothing about it.

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 91,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,375
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #10 on: September 30, 2018, 20:47:21 »
Not knowing what "corroboration" means in a legal sense, I went to Wikipedia.

"Corroborating evidence (or corroboration) is evidence that tends to support a proposition that is already supported by some initial evidence, therefore confirming the proposition."

What would be the initial evidence?  The accusation and the victim's story presumably are the proposition, and the only other evidence available supports Kavanaugh strongly.  If a person can be deemed guilty based on a story, then the liberal principle of "innocent until proven guilty" has been shat out, along with the general idea "better 10 guilty go free than one innocent be convicted".  If unsupported stories are deemed sufficient, then prepare for many false claims (the kind that are unproven and can neither realistically be proven or disproven) to be levied in future as weapons (in politics, in the workplace, etc).

To summarize, Kavanaugh isn't guilty of anything, and all the people suspecting or alleging guilt have taken leave of their senses (by virtue of ignoring the evidence) in pursuit of their politics.  "Innocent until proven guilty" is the default out of the court as well as in it, except for people inclined to tyranny.  All of the questions people claim have been raised about Kavanaugh's history or temperament speak only to their own prejudices and political agendas.  The Democrats on the committee were raising infantile points and deserved to be brought up short.

People are reading too much into the boilerplate "I found Ford credible" statements.  People against the nomination have a strong motive to say it even if they don't believe it, because they want the nomination torpedoed.  People with reputations (politicians and other public figures, people who are worried about their in-group status, etc) who are for the nomination also have a strong motive to say it, because they don't want to be at the bottom of a pig wrestling match.

Similarly, I doubt the additional weeks' delay is something Republicans regret.  Rachel Mitchell was there to insulate the Republican members of the committee from political (election campaign) heat.  Playing along with the demand for one more FBI "investigation" is also political insulation; Flake, who is not seeking re-election, not coincidentally was one of the few Republicans who could initiate it without consequences from Republican voters.

That everything has been played to effect political delay, including all the excuses made to delay the hearings and to delay and extend any kind of further investigation, tends to negate the possibility that any of the accusations have any merit.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Online PPCLI Guy

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 221,515
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,746
  • It's all good
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #11 on: September 30, 2018, 21:32:47 »
Highest court

Highest standard.

Pretty simple.

For all the apologisers and conspiracy theorists, try applying the above litmus test to your odd protestations.
"The higher the rank, the more necessary it is that boldness should be accompanied by a reflective mind....for with increase in rank it becomes always a matter less of self-sacrifice and more a matter of the preservation of others, and the good of the whole."

Karl von Clausewitz

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 91,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,375
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #12 on: September 30, 2018, 21:44:23 »
In which case Kavanaugh should be confirmed.  He's had an exemplary career and led a praiseworthy life.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 273,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,242
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #13 on: September 30, 2018, 21:47:48 »
Not knowing what "corroboration" means in a legal sense, I went to Wikipedia.

"Corroborating evidence (or corroboration) is evidence that tends to support a proposition that is already supported by some initial evidence, therefore confirming the proposition."

What would be the initial evidence? The accusation and the victim's story presumably are the proposition, and the only other evidence available supports Kavanaugh strongly.  If a person can be deemed guilty based on a story, then the liberal principle of "innocent until proven guilty" has been shat out, along with the general idea "better 10 guilty go free than one innocent be convicted".  If unsupported stories are deemed sufficient, then prepare for many false claims (the kind that are unproven and can neither realistically be proven or disproven) to be levied in future as weapons (in politics, in the workplace, etc).

To summarize, Kavanaugh isn't guilty of anything, and all the people suspecting or alleging guilt have taken leave of their senses (by virtue of ignoring the evidence) in pursuit of their politics.  "Innocent until proven guilty" is the default out of the court as well as in it, except for people inclined to tyranny.  All of the questions people claim have been raised about Kavanaugh's history or temperament speak only to their own prejudices and political agendas.  The Democrats on the committee were raising infantile points and deserved to be brought up short.

. . .

The sworn statements by any complainant in an assault case (including sexual assault) is in fact evidence and not a mere "story". If believed then it is sufficient to convict. If the accused also presents evidence which is credible then that leads to a reasonable doubt upon which he/she should be found not guilty.

Thousands of people in Canada are convicted on the basis of evidence by a sole complainant every year. That's how the law works both here and in the US.

There is no evidence that supports Kavanaugh "strongly". Kavanaugh denies the incident. That is evidence which is open to be looked at critically by anyone since it's self-serving. No other witness has come forward to deny that the event occurred. At best there are people who say they have no memory of it. In the case of Mark Judge it too is self-serving but in short supports nothing one way or the other.

You are right that Kavanaugh hasn't been found guilty of anything. I'm not sure but I presume that the jurisdiction where this happened probably has a statute of limitation on it (Canada doesn't) so I presume he will never be charged with anything much less convicted.

In the spirit of full disclosure I don't like Kavanaugh but my dislike is based on the fact that he is a "constitutional originalist" and entirely too strong a supporter of Presidential immunity. Up until recently I considered him an upright citizen.

What the recent hearings have led me to believe is that he was an entitled frat boy jock in high school and college with a definite drinking problem. More recently there have been questions about his gambling and the $200,000 for baseball season tickets he spent for friends and was repaid. I don't consider that a proven issue one way or the other. His testimony, which I watched, left me with the distinct impression that he lied through his teeth to the committee in order to minimize his youthful indiscretions (I don't include the more serious Ford allegation as an indiscretion; just the general frat boy stuff). Calling his drinking as being at a legal age when it clearly wasn't, his false definitions of "boofing" and "devils triangle" and claiming that his reputation for "ralphing" comes from a weak stomach and not overindulgence in alcohol and the mischaracterisation of the other attendees letters and the numerous other incidents of evasiveness and rationalization all make me question his integrity. This is easily on a par with Clinton's "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" -- and I know how you feel about that one. To me a lie is a lie. I thought Clinton was a liar then and I think Kavanaugh is one now.

 [cheers]
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline Bird_Gunner45

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 52,741
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,115
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #14 on: September 30, 2018, 21:48:00 »
In the US we have a statute of limitations. The FBI now has begun to investigate these 36 year old allegations. The Democrats are doing everything to derail this nomination.

the question isn't in regards to a criminal investigation or statutes of limitations and the statement seems to miss the broader point of debate- do you want someone who potentially committed a serious sexual crime (and if he had been convicted would be on a list) to be a judge on the supreme court? Does this judgment seem worthy of the position that is being offered? Regardless of political affiliation (which lets be honest, this is all this is) there is due diligence that should be conducted.

.........and one can only wonder at the hullabaloo had this been a democrat and the POTUS was democrat and the GOP trotted out a whole bunch of dubious accusers and smear campaigns in order to subvert the process. The fact that none of this was revealed when the democrats approved his nomination to the federal court, very quickly, is totally suspect in itself.

The FBI has a week, then they can give the GOP Senate a chance to bypass the committee and blow up the filibuster. The sooner the better.

Meanwhile, it's a good thing our PM isn't open to hearings like this. However, then again, why not?

Your assertion that democrats/liberals would be treated any differently seems to not really hold water when one considers the fates of Weinstein, Spacey, and Al Franken. Al Franken of course was very much a democrat and was very much forced to resign under investigation by democrats for misdoings which arose. As for the assertion that the GOP doesn't regularly trot out dubious accusers and conduct smear campaigns to subvert a political process, I can only assume that you are being tongue in cheek as you only need look as far as the "birthers" and the prolonged witch hunt about email servers and Benghazi that Clinton was under (or the impeachment proceedings against Bill Clinton for a consentual if ill advised sexual relationship).

Not knowing what "corroboration" means in a legal sense, I went to Wikipedia.

"Corroborating evidence (or corroboration) is evidence that tends to support a proposition that is already supported by some initial evidence, therefore confirming the proposition."

What would be the initial evidence?  The accusation and the victim's story presumably are the proposition, and the only other evidence available supports Kavanaugh strongly.  If a person can be deemed guilty based on a story, then the liberal principle of "innocent until proven guilty" has been shat out, along with the general idea "better 10 guilty go free than one innocent be convicted".  If unsupported stories are deemed sufficient, then prepare for many false claims (the kind that are unproven and can neither realistically be proven or disproven) to be levied in future as weapons (in politics, in the workplace, etc).

To summarize, Kavanaugh isn't guilty of anything, and all the people suspecting or alleging guilt have taken leave of their senses (by virtue of ignoring the evidence) in pursuit of their politics.  "Innocent until proven guilty" is the default out of the court as well as in it, except for people inclined to tyranny.  All of the questions people claim have been raised about Kavanaugh's history or temperament speak only to their own prejudices and political agendas.  The Democrats on the committee were raising infantile points and deserved to be brought up short.

People are reading too much into the boilerplate "I found Ford credible" statements.  People against the nomination have a strong motive to say it even if they don't believe it, because they want the nomination torpedoed.  People with reputations (politicians and other public figures, people who are worried about their in-group status, etc) who are for the nomination also have a strong motive to say it, because they don't want to be at the bottom of a pig wrestling match.

Similarly, I doubt the additional weeks' delay is something Republicans regret.  Rachel Mitchell was there to insulate the Republican members of the committee from political (election campaign) heat.  Playing along with the demand for one more FBI "investigation" is also political insulation; Flake, who is not seeking re-election, not coincidentally was one of the few Republicans who could initiate it without consequences from Republican voters.

That everything has been played to effect political delay, including all the excuses made to delay the hearings and to delay and extend any kind of further investigation, tends to negate the possibility that any of the accusations have any merit.

The reality of sexual assaults is that they are by their nature a "he said/she said" crime as generally people aren't raped in a group setting. So, how does the legal system then punish offenders unless there is some mechanism. Moreover, one of the key reasons why women don't come forward is due to feelings of hopelessness and helplessness that include seeing how other women (such as in this case) have been treated and that they wont be believed. The difficulty with a high profile case such as this (or Clarence Thomas) is that it reinforces this image that there's no point in coming forward because you're just going to be accused of lying. Frankly, comparing her and Cavanaugh's testimony was enlightening- she told a story and he got irrationally angry, which made him look guilty (in a personal sense not necessarily a legal sense). Absolutely there must be fair proceedings and the accused must be seen as innocent until proven guilty, but the accuser must also not be viewed as "lying until proven not to be" which unfortunately is how this is always done. If that was your daughter/sister/mother I feel you would have a different opinion. But it's only for a seat on the highest court in the US, so no reason to do any due diligence.

What I dont really understand is why the Republicans are willing to do on the hill for this particular judge. If/when he is pushed through they will lose a ton of political capital, unless it has something to do with his views on executive branch authority and his statement that, "Congress might consider a law exempting a President -- while in office -- from criminal prosecution and investigation, including from questioning by criminal prosecutors or defense counsel."

Online PPCLI Guy

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 221,515
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,746
  • It's all good
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #15 on: September 30, 2018, 21:48:19 »
In which case Kavanaugh should be confirmed.  He's had an exemplary career and led a praiseworthy life.

Other than that unresolved sexual assault allegation, the ABA concerns 12 years ago, and again the recent ABA concerns....but yes, other than that and....oh wait - there was the partisan outburst during his hearing and his churlishness under questioning...but other than all that, I am sure you have it right - very exemplary, very praiseworthy.

"The higher the rank, the more necessary it is that boldness should be accompanied by a reflective mind....for with increase in rank it becomes always a matter less of self-sacrifice and more a matter of the preservation of others, and the good of the whole."

Karl von Clausewitz

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 273,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,242
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #16 on: September 30, 2018, 22:08:32 »
Other than that unresolved sexual assault allegation, the ABA concerns 12 years ago, and again the recent ABA concerns....but yes, other than that and....oh wait - there was the partisan outburst during his hearing and his churlishness under questioning...but other than all that, I am sure you have it right - very exemplary, very praiseworthy.

See here:

Quote
The American Bar Association had concerns about Kavanaugh 12 years ago. Republicans dismissed those, too.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/09/28/american-bar-association-had-kavanaugh-concerns-years-ago-republicans-dismissed-those-too/?utm_term=.b1b4314294ff

 [cheers]
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline CloudCover

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 55,220
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,578
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #17 on: September 30, 2018, 22:18:18 »
Other than that unresolved sexual assault allegation, the ABA concerns 12 years ago, and again the recent ABA concerns....but yes, other than that and....oh wait - there was the partisan outburst during his hearing and his churlishness under questioning...but other than all that, I am sure you have it right - very exemplary, very praiseworthy.

Just clarify, the ABA have no special concerns with Kavanaugh, and continue to rate him as “well qualified” and beyond reproach. They recommended him to the Senate to proceed. Their concern is with the process that has unfolded and support the FBI investigation (which they support) on the sole fact it should not (hopefully) be a partisan led or directed investigation. Further, the ABA is concerned only with allegations raised by complainants, and not the wider probe that is being demanded.

Kavanaugh will fall down not because he did anything to any of these women ( he probably didn’t) but he will go down because of his testimonial conduct and his own credibility in regards to the partisanship allegiance that he revealed in his testimony.
I find it ironic and disconcerting that Ginsberg, now off the court, has come out swinging as a full blown advocate for the partisan nature of judicial nominees as an acceptable method to vet beyond the pale. Although always a strong and persuasive minority voice, she was often the one creating judgements leading the opinions on protection of individuals suspected or accused of fundamental criminal or civil rights for persons accused, militating against narrow minded and poorly executed investigations by the state, and was generally a voice for those who are accused without credible evidence beyond bare accusations. In fact this was the very thing she railed against while on the court.
... Move!! ...

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 273,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,242
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #18 on: September 30, 2018, 22:23:44 »
Just clarify, the ABA have no special concerns with Kavanaugh, and continue to rate him as “well qualified” and beyond reproach. They recommended him to the Senate to proceed. Their concern is with the process that has unfolded and support the FBI investigation (which they support) on the sole fact it should not (hopefully) be a partisan led or directed investigation. Further, the ABA is concerned only with allegations raised by complainants, and not the wider probe that is being demanded.

Kavanaugh will fall down not because he did anything to any of these women ( he probably didn’t) but he will go down because of his testimonial conduct and his own credibility in regards to the partisanship allegiance that he revealed in his testimony.
I find it ironic and disconcerting that Ginsberg, now off the court, has come out swinging as a full blown advocate for the partisan nature of judicial nominees as an acceptable method to vet beyond the pale. Although always a strong and persuasive minority voice, she was often the one creating judgements leading the opinions on protection of individuals suspected or accused of fundamental criminal or civil rights for persons accused, militating against narrow minded and poorly executed investigations by the state, and was generally a voice for those who are accused without credible evidence beyond bare accusations. In fact this was the very thing she railed against while on the court.

Do you know something about Justice Ginsberg that we don't know????

Last I saw she was still sitting and had every intention of staying there.  ???

 :cheers:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 147,800
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,800
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #19 on: September 30, 2018, 22:25:15 »
As far as I know, Mr. Kavanaugh has not been charged with any crime, nor are the hearings on his appointment before the U.S. Senate a legal matter. There is no "standard of proof" at issue, nor any breach of a criminal statute at play.

This said, it seems to me that the full and sole purpose of "confirmation" hearing before the U.S. Senate are a matter of verifying the suitability and fitness of a proposed appointee for the office for which the appointee is proposed.

In the case of judges of the highest U.S. court, it seems to me that two important factors that should be considered (amongst many and not necessarily above or beyond those others) are whether the proposed appointee shows that he has "good judgement" (in the "common sense" and "fairness"  sense) and is a "wise man" in the most positive sense of the term.

Without going into any debate about the "accusations" against him, I watched his own personal performance before the senate committee and must say that he failed to strike me as someone who has either of those two qualities that I find essential for a Supreme Court judge. In my mind, any Senators who wish to ensure, above party politics, that the Supreme Court is furnished with judges that show good common sense , decency and wisdom should vote against his appointment on the basis of his own appearance before the committee alone.

But that's my personal, free, opinion and it's worth what you pay for it.  :nod: 

Offline CloudCover

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 55,220
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,578
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #20 on: September 30, 2018, 22:33:37 »
FJAG: I read those reports and more than less looked at the persons comments -on average- that were interviewed and complained. A record of anti-Bush (primarily Academic) commentary that ran completely counter to the judicial history of the man. In particular, he had been sceptical and challenging on de novo cases for which there was already an existing remedy. And yes, he did not consider the state as an untrustable  enemy of the people.
Still, I don’t think he should get the nod, his testimony was confrontational, he chose words poorly, and opened himself up to inquiry that was self inflicted and I wonder just how many beers each week he really consumes. More than the average judge, apparently.
It may well be that from this past week forward there will never be a judge that is “ good enough”,but in this case he’s just not credible due to claims outside of the sexual misconduct allegations.
... Move!! ...

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 273,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,242
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #21 on: September 30, 2018, 22:35:41 »
Yet another of Kavanaugh's former classmates who say that he mischaracterized his drinking problem before the committee. This one's a male.

Quote
North Carolina State University professor Chad Ludington has joined a handful of other former classmates of Brett Kavanaugh in contradicting the Supreme Court nominee’s claims about his past drinking habits.

Ludington told the New York Times in a statement Sunday that Kavanaugh played down “the degree and frequency” of his drinking to the Senate Judiciary Committee last week. He said he often saw Kavanaugh “staggering from alcohol consumption.”

Kavanaugh, who has been accused of sexual misconduct by three different women, denied in his testimony that there was any possibility he ever drank so much alcohol that he may have lapses in his memory.

Ludington called Kavanaugh’s answers about drinking a “blatant mischaracterization” based on his experiences around the judge when they attended Yale University together.  Ludington claimed he often saw Kavanaugh “belligerent and aggressive” while drunk.

More here:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/brett-kavanaugh-classmates_us_5bb157bce4b027da00d46d72

 [cheers]
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline kkwd

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 110,282
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 631
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #22 on: September 30, 2018, 23:34:15 »
I don't subscribe to forced acceptance. I'll make up my own mind. Diversity of thought and opinion is essential.

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 91,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,375
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #23 on: September 30, 2018, 23:40:52 »
>The sworn statements by any complainant in an assault case (including sexual assault) is in fact evidence and not a mere "story". If believed then it is sufficient to convict.

I understand that then to be the initial evidence.

Nothing that has come to light about Kavanaugh's teenage and university years is remarkably different from what I observed (I went though HS and university at about the same time).  It's foolish to take things written in yearbooks at face value.  It's foolish to assume that the understanding of slang phrases can't differ, or that people sometimes misunderstand them (I know this by numerous examples).  It's foolish to assume that things people say - particularly boys and young men - reflect reality or actual intent rather than wishful thinking or posturing.  Most importantly, though, I know that virtually everyone I knew in HS or uni was a remarkably different person 5, 10, and 15 years later; many of those who were jackasses became serious, accomplished, straitlaced people.  To assume that a person is marked by youthful jackass-ery (excluding serious crimes) much later in life is a failing of the assessor, not the person.  The only relevant item in this case is the accusation of sexual assault.

>you want someone who potentially committed a serious sexual crime (and if he had been convicted would be on a list) to be a judge on the supreme court?

The problem with that is "potentially" is inflicted by mere accusation.  The bar has to be higher than that.

>Weinstein, Spacey, and Al Franken.

Weinstein and Spacey are not politicians.  But Keith Ellison is.  Or ask Democrats how they feel about Juanita Broaddrick, whose accusation has long-standing and was contemporaneous.  Or ask Democrats whether they will revisit Ted Kennedy's reputation.  Some Democrats are, in fact, treated very differently.

>she told a story and he got irrationally angry

Don't forget that Kavanaugh was also accused of orchestrating gang rapes, and was asked inane questions by committee Democrats.  His anger had more than one font.  Most people accused of orchestrating gang rapes should be expected to show emotion.

>impeachment proceedings against Bill Clinton for a consentual if ill advised sexual relationship

Clinton was impeached for perjury, not for a sexual relationship.

 Some people are outraged by Kavanaugh's emotional displays (temper); I am complacent - his anger was merited; his scolding (and schooling) of the Democratic committee members was warranted.

The concerns of the ABA from 12 years ago have apparently been resolved (his current rating); the committee stands behind the current rating irrespective of the committee chairman's personal initiative (the letter that got everyone so excited).

Politically, Republicans stand to lose their supporters if they don't vote to confirm, and they never stood to gain support from anyone not already in their camp.  If allegations against Kavanaugh are proven, there is an impeachment process.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 273,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,242
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #24 on: October 01, 2018, 00:07:18 »
Brad.

I'm not worried that he was a jackass in high school and college.

I'm worried about the fact that he's lying about it now.

 [cheers]
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 91,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,375
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #25 on: October 01, 2018, 03:34:59 »
That part I don't get.  Why jeopardize the nomination over small beer, no matter how embarrassing it might seem?  Maybe he can explain himself; maybe not.  I won't be surprised if Republicans still vote to confirm - they vote to support one of their liars,  just as Democrats once did on behalf of one of theirs.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Online Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 194,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,662
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #26 on: October 01, 2018, 08:03:19 »
I can say that I haven't paid much attention to this, as I quite frankly don't care.

I can say, as my phone buzzes every 5 minutes with a lurid update, that it sure makes me appreciate the way our Canadian system works.
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 169,025
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,878
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #27 on: October 01, 2018, 09:30:41 »
My take on this situation is that it is pretty much impossible to decern what the objective "truth" is anymore.

The deeper you delve, the more conflicting information you find. Depending on your political beliefs, you can arm yourself with excellent talking points from either side of the issue. But i dont really trust that any of that is actually the full truth.

Like Infanteer, I am past caring what the US body politic does to itself anymore.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 350,711
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,163
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 121,875
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,468
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #29 on: October 01, 2018, 10:34:03 »
If a simple unsupported allegation is taken as fact then the rule of law is no more. There has to be protections in place or else lies are taken as fact.

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 306,040
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,840
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #30 on: October 01, 2018, 11:53:12 »
If a simple unsupported allegation is taken as fact then the rule of law is no more. There has to be protections in place or else lies are taken as fact.

Thanks, you've just destroyed the election platforms of all Walter Mittys and most politicians....
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 273,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,242
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #31 on: October 01, 2018, 12:12:38 »
If a simple unsupported allegation is taken as fact then the rule of law is no more. There has to be protections in place or else lies are taken as fact.

An allegation, given under oath, is evidence, and if credible and believed (even if unsupported) can be accepted as fact by the trier of fact and used to convict. That is the rule of law in both your country and mine. The days when a woman's testimony needed corroboration are gone and good riddance.

. . .
Like Infanteer, I am past caring what the US body politic does to itself anymore.

Like you and Infanteer I frequently ask myself why I do care.

The only thing that I have come up with is that I have spent much time in the States and genuinely care about Americans. In many ways they are like us and I want to see them successful and happy. On top of that they are like a bull in a china shop. You can't ignore a country that is ten times our size and whose entertainment media comes into your home every night.

Trump, Kavanaugh, the whole Supreme Court issue and their Congress are not the genesis of their problem; they're symptoms of a much deeper, divisive issue based on conflicting philosophies that has the potential to spill over into our own society. I truly wish them good luck but am not optimistic that it will resolve itself any time soon.

 [cheers]
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -7995.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 282,737
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,676
    • Army.ca
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #32 on: October 01, 2018, 18:46:16 »
Sex-Crimes Prosecutor: Claims From Ford Against Judge Kavanaugh Lack Sufficient Evidence
https://www.wsj.com/articles/sex-crimes-prosecutor-claims-from-ford-against-judge-kavanaugh-lack-sufficient-evidence-1538369619/
Quote
<snip>Rachel Mitchell said in a memo to senators, ‘I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case.’
By Natalie Andrews
Oct. 1, 2018 12:53 a.m. ET
WASHINGTON—The sex-crimes prosecutor hired by Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee to question Christine Blasey Ford about her allegations of assault against Brett Kavanaugh told the panel she wouldn’t have prosecuted the case, according to documents viewed by The Wall Street Journal.
More at link
Corruption in politics doesn't scare me.
What scares me is how comfortable people are doing nothing about it.

Online Xylric

  • Member
  • ****
  • 7,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 203
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #33 on: October 01, 2018, 19:21:12 »
Having watched both during the proceedings, I'm led to conclude based on body language and other cues that both Kavanaugh and Ford were lying at times. Which makes things quite interesting in my opinion, because it's entirely possible for someone to lie without even realising it due to the fickle nature of memory. I don't doubt that Ford was assaulted in some fashion, but there's too many unanswered questions involved for me to be certain, as she appears to believe, that Kavanaugh was the one responsible. It's a difficult situation to be sure, and the reality seems to me that they were both lying and telling the truth in similar proportion - exactly what I would expect for memories from 20+ years before.

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 254,775
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,009
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #34 on: October 01, 2018, 20:54:58 »
Sex-Crimes Prosecutor: Claims From Ford Against Judge Kavanaugh Lack Sufficient Evidence
https://www.wsj.com/articles/sex-crimes-prosecutor-claims-from-ford-against-judge-kavanaugh-lack-sufficient-evidence-1538369619/ More at link

So the lawyer paid to say “there’s no basis for prosecution,” indeed said “there’s no basis for prosecution?”  Looks like she’ll be getting that paycheck. :nod:

G2G

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 197,720
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,812
  • Freespeecher
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #35 on: October 01, 2018, 21:18:47 »
Like T6, I fully agree the greater issue here is upholding the principles of the Rule of Law.

Whatever may or may not have happened, there is no way whatsoever to verify these allegations, and the nature and timing of them make it very clear this was a partisan character assassination attack.

Put yourself in the same situation: you are looking for a job or expecting a promotion, when suddenly you are accused.

There is no contemporious police report or complaint sworn out at the time of the alleged incident. There is no forensic evidence. Witnesses either deny the event took place, or cannot remember or offer different stories. Even the alleged victim's story is inconsistent and full of gaps and omissions.

How do you defend yourself?

The baying mob rejects the concept of presumption of innocence. You cannot prove a negative (this is a logical impossibility), and since the statute of limitations is going expired, eyewitness testimony is not, and cannot be considered reliable, but the call is out to fire you/prevent you from getting the job/denying your promotion.

And in the real world, there are plenty of people out there who are jealous and covet your job or promotion, or envious and wish to drag you down, or unhinged and do such things for whatever sick pleasure they draw from it. I doubt anyone here would like to live in a society with no filters or protections against such acts.

The end result is going to be the further erosion of the productive, high trust society we live in today. I doubt we want to see what comes after that.....
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -7995.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 282,737
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,676
    • Army.ca
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #36 on: October 01, 2018, 22:57:11 »
So the lawyer paid to say “there’s no basis for prosecution,” indeed said “there’s no basis for prosecution?”  Looks like she’ll be getting that paycheck. :nod:

G2G
Just like the democrat minion passing envelopes to Ford's lawyers. Of course, it must be unbelievable because they're Republican, but so far in all of this from day one, the democrats have been proven as the unscrupulous, lying cheats. I'll not pretend to take the WSJ at face value, but it is, supposedly, one of those sources even the left is comfortable with.

Now, unless you are prepared to say that justices and judges are incapable of separating the law from party loyalty, your vieled accusation against the prosecutors learned opinion being biased is just biased in its own right. And if that's truly your belief, why are you even interested in what is involved in picking a judge. After all, they will be whatever their purchaser wishes. Right?

What a laugh.
Corruption in politics doesn't scare me.
What scares me is how comfortable people are doing nothing about it.

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 91,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,375
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #37 on: October 01, 2018, 23:12:06 »
>it's entirely possible for someone to lie without even realising it due to the fickle nature of memory

If Ford and Kavanaugh each believed what they said to be true and made false statements without realizing it, then they might be mistaken, but not liars.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Online Xylric

  • Member
  • ****
  • 7,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 203
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #38 on: October 02, 2018, 01:02:03 »
>it's entirely possible for someone to lie without even realising it due to the fickle nature of memory

If Ford and Kavanaugh each believed what they said to be true and made false statements without realizing it, then they might be mistaken, but not liars.

True, as what I mean is that there's a threshold at which an honest mistake becomes a lie, and it falls to the intent of the statement to determine the difference. There's a concept I like to use in fiction which I refer to as a "truthful lie" - a statement which while objectively true is stated in such a way to lead the listener to believe an assumed falsity as fact. Likewise, there's the reverse - a statement which, while demonstrably false, leads the listener to accept an assumed fact as accurate. It seems very much to me that both types are at play, which makes it extremely difficult for an outside observer unfamiliar with the precise details to come to any sort of reliable and useful conclusion.

Simply put, I don't believe either of them have a genuine intent to deceive, which is what would make them liars, but I do believe that neither of them have been ideally truthful - which is something which should be plainly obvious, because deception is among one of the first skills humans pick up, as I've never encountered a two year old that *didn't* voraciously claim innocence over missing cookies.

No matter the outcome of these events, I simply think that if Kavanaugh isn't confirmed, the only thing that will happen is that in the eyes of a shocking proportion of the country, someone worse will get the next nomination. So, assuming worst case thinking on multiple fronts for a moment, along with assuming that is guilty of the things he is accused of doing, there comes a question to my mind - is it a reasonable course of action to appoint a sexual predator to the Supreme Court of the United States if the alternative is the possible cessation of any sort of bipartisan cooperation between the Left and Right?

Obviously, my thinking is much less severe in the long run. The only thing at all remarkable about the accusations against a judge being appointed to the highest court in the country he serves in is how unremarkable they are from a global standpoint. I can think of a few dozen examples in history who are far, far worse. No one's perfect, obviously, and I would truthfully say that even if he is guilty, it's more than possible for people to become better than they were. Denying him the nomination is reasonable, but destroying his life is not.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 350,711
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,163
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #39 on: October 02, 2018, 05:41:54 »
Quote
women who come forward with complaints of sexual assault and harassment must be supported and believed.
-Justin Trudeau

I can very much see us facing a similar situation as this approaching our next election. Sexual assault allegations are politically weaponized.

There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 553,655
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,693
    • The job.
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #40 on: October 02, 2018, 08:08:31 »
-Justin Trudeau

I can very much see us facing a similar situation as this approaching our next election. Sexual assault allegations are politically weaponized.

"women who come forward with complaints of sexual assault and harassment must be supported and believed. "

For reference to that discussion in Canadian Politics,

Prime minister apologizes to reporter but doesn't remember why?
https://army.ca/forums/index.php?topic=128395.50
3 pages.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 167,035
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,300
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #41 on: October 02, 2018, 10:56:41 »
>it's entirely possible for someone to lie without even realising it due to the fickle nature of memory

If Ford and Kavanaugh each believed what they said to be true and made false statements without realizing it, then they might be mistaken, but not liars.

It would appear that her fear of flying was "woke" upon being requested to come for a interview, seems it wasn't triggered by her other adventures flying here and there.

Offline Strike

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 34,541
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,463
  • Welcome to the Dead Parrot's Society.
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #42 on: October 02, 2018, 11:06:42 »
It would appear that her fear of flying was "woke" upon being requested to come for a interview, seems it wasn't triggered by her other adventures flying here and there.

Maybe she takes meds when she flies?

I'm scared of heights, but I flew helicopters for a number of years, sometimes with the doors off.

Fear is an irrational thing and makes no sense to those people who don't share it.
Stop assuming I'm a man!

Don't know how long I want to keep playing this game...

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 306,040
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,840
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #43 on: October 02, 2018, 11:34:26 »
It would appear that her fear of flying was "woke" upon being requested to come for a interview, seems it wasn't triggered by her other adventures flying here and there.

'False face must hide what the false heart doth know.' Macbeth
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 197,720
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,812
  • Freespeecher
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #44 on: October 02, 2018, 12:42:35 »
Quote
women who come forward with complaints of sexual assault and harassment must be supported and believed.
-Justin Trudeau

This really cuts to the heart of why the weaponized #metoo is such a terrible thing. Women who come forward must be believed, unless the accused is on "your" side. Real and well documented cases of real abuse are ignored, because they might hurt "your" side, while even vague and unsubstantiated accusations are hurled at the "other" side.

So if you are a real victim of abuse, what happens? Do you attempt to lodge a complaint anyway, knowing that one side will jump aboard and expand it like a balloon, while the other side will dismiss it as being a partisan attack? For the accused, how can they possibly proceed in a situation where all the protections of the Rule of Law have been abandoned?

And the situational nature of this goes beyond sexual abuse, what about domestic abuse or "honour killings"? Similarly FGM is "off the table" for discussion. You can probably think of other issues which are no longer spoken of, and people who try are shouted down, "disqualified" or "deplatformed".

And if rational discussion os no longer permitted (or even punished-look at "compelled speech" or how "Human Rights" tribunals operate), it dies not mean these issues go away, only that they now fester below the surface, ready to explode at an unexpected instant and probably in ways that the vast majority of people (regardless of their positions) will not approve of.

So the only way to get this under control before it destroys our high productivity, High Trust society is to insist that the same rules and same protections apply to everyone (the Rule of Law). Ignore "whataboutism", focus on the known facts and what can be verified. If you are unfortunately a victim, you MUST swear out a complaint right away and have forensic evidence gathered: "he said/she said" is no way to resolve an issue.

If we as a people collectively insist upon this standard of behaviour, and apply it to every case, regardless of if it is Justin Trudeau or Justin Smith, then we have a chance of salvaging something out of this mess.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline Strike

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 34,541
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,463
  • Welcome to the Dead Parrot's Society.
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #45 on: October 02, 2018, 13:46:28 »
If you are unfortunately a victim, you MUST swear out a complaint right away and have forensic evidence gathered: "he said/she said" is no way to resolve an issue.


That looks at the whole situation pretty simplistically, ignoring the power play that usually drives an assault.  I mean, you may as well just tell people to stop assaulting others and then everything will be alright.
Stop assuming I'm a man!

Don't know how long I want to keep playing this game...

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -7995.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 282,737
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,676
    • Army.ca
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #46 on: October 02, 2018, 15:13:37 »
-Justin Trudeau

I can very much see us facing a similar situation as this approaching our next election. Sexual assault allegations are politically weaponized.

It's already been put away in Canada, so far as I can tell. After Trudeau's own #metoo moment this year, the precedent appears to have been set.

Deny it, shrug your shoulders and say you remember it differently, then walk away. No consideration to the supposed victim and no adverse press coverage from the MSM.

The grit's fiasco, in the handling of this, has made a mockery of Canada's #metoo movement and any kind of compassion for the victims has been diminished by the government's handling of Trudeau's alleged Kootney groping episode.

Will it stop people from trying?

Nope.
Corruption in politics doesn't scare me.
What scares me is how comfortable people are doing nothing about it.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 217,025
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,981
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

"If change isn’t allowed to be a process, it becomes an event." - Penny Mordaunt 10/10/2019

“Life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards” ~ Soren Kierkegaard

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 350,711
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,163
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #48 on: October 03, 2018, 06:20:28 »
Maybe she takes meds when she flies?

I'm scared of heights, but I flew helicopters for a number of years, sometimes with the doors off.

Fear is an irrational thing and makes no sense to those people who don't share it.

Knowing you're scared of heights but fly  helicopters - if a colonel was in line to be promoted and you went to the military police   merit boards and accused him of sexually assaulting you 30 years ago, and knowing his promotion was a time sensitive issue, and you were asked to fly somewhere to discuss it and refused because you're "scared of heights" do you think people might have just cause of suspicion? Or is fear just irrational and the circumstances don't matter?
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Strike

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 34,541
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,463
  • Welcome to the Dead Parrot's Society.
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #49 on: October 03, 2018, 09:00:23 »
Knowing you're scared of heights but fly  helicopters - if a colonel was in line to be promoted and you went to the military police   merit boards and accused him of sexually assaulting you 30 years ago, and knowing his promotion was a time sensitive issue, and you were asked to fly somewhere to discuss it and refused because you're "scared of heights" do you think people might have just cause of suspicion? Or is fear just irrational and the circumstances don't matter?

She didn't refuse (obviously) but asked if there was any way the interviews could have been conducted at her home so she could "avoid" flying. That's quite a big distinction - refusing vs avoiding.
Stop assuming I'm a man!

Don't know how long I want to keep playing this game...

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 350,711
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,163
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #50 on: October 03, 2018, 09:05:01 »
Good point, yes big distinction.

Another article about the 3rd witness who appears to be a bit less than 100% credible.


https://www.dailywire.com/news/36571/ap-provides-evidence-swetnick-tried-swindle-james-barrett?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=benshapiro
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 100,950
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,207
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #51 on: October 03, 2018, 12:20:48 »
She didn't refuse (obviously) but asked if there was any way the interviews could have been conducted at her home so she could "avoid" flying. That's quite a big distinction - refusing vs avoiding.

She was asked several times how she wanted her testimony to be heard, various options, including committee investigators going to a location of her choice,incl CA. It appears that her legal representation did not pass the info to he re a location of her choice.
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline Petard

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 34,485
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,297
  • Once a gunner, always a gunner
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #52 on: November 04, 2018, 18:16:42 »
This recent episode of the “nature of things” on memory certainly challenges some of the established practices of collecting, and accepting, eye witness testimony

https://youtu.be/1W5vhzp92ZQ

Offline Larry Strong

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 227,921
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,686
  • 546 days from 0 to being King of the Castle
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #53 on: November 04, 2018, 18:47:25 »
Quote
One of Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh’s accusers admitted this week that she made up her lurid tale of a backseat car rape, saying it “was a tactic” to try to derail the judge’s confirmation to the Supreme Court.

More at link...

https://globalnews.ca/news/4628088/brett-kavanaugh-rape-accusation-lie/


Cheers
Larry
Proud sponsor of the Maple Leaf Legacy Project. http://www.mapleleaflegacy.ca

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 273,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,242
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #54 on: November 04, 2018, 19:00:06 »
This recent episode of the “nature of things” on memory certainly challenges some of the established practices of collecting, and accepting, eye witness testimony

https://youtu.be/1W5vhzp92ZQ

They taught me in law school thirty-five years ago that eye witness evidence is amongst the least reliable.

 :cheers:

Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline Petard

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 34,485
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,297
  • Once a gunner, always a gunner
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #55 on: November 05, 2018, 02:16:04 »
Given such testimony can be challenged on its accuracy if not its veracity, and it gets even more questionable over time, is there not some need then by prosecution to provide corroborating evidence, for example evidence that at least puts the accused at the scene of the crime?

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 350,711
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,163
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 100,950
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,207
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #57 on: November 05, 2018, 08:59:38 »
She also said she did not write (author) the accusation letter. Who did?
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 584,045
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,471
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #58 on: November 05, 2018, 09:24:18 »
One of Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh’s accusers admitted this week that she made up her lurid tale of a backseat car rape, saying it “was a tactic” to try to derail the judge’s confirmation to the Supreme Court.
Hopefully, she'll be charged, convicted (if the media account proves accuraate), and held accountable for her actions;  this shouldn't be a political party issue -- although of course, it will be.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2018, 09:28:14 by Journeyman »

Offline CloudCover

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 55,220
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,578
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #59 on: November 06, 2018, 17:41:13 »
Given such testimony can be challenged on its accuracy if not its veracity, and it gets even more questionable over time, is there not some need then by prosecution to provide corroborating evidence, for example evidence that at least puts the accused at the scene of the crime?
I do not know about the US< but in Canada it is an essential element of the offence of assault (including sexual assault) that the Crown must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused was present on the date and time that the assault is alleged to have occurred. That generally requires much more than testimonial evidence of the complainant. One example outside of that might be where the accused was wearing a disguise or a mask and then a judge will have to make a determination about the location of the accused at the material time. Again, strong evidence is required. If that cannot be established beyond a reasonable doubt, there is little prospect for a conviction. This is part of the reason why convictions for sexual assault are challenging cases- usually there is only the accused and the complainant present when the alleged assault occurred. On the other hand, despite this, it rare in a trial where an accused raises this defence- usually this information is vetted by the police prior to trial.  The police have a duty to the accused to conduct a proper investigation before the investigation turns into a trial...
... Move!! ...

Offline Retired AF Guy

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 66,175
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,885
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #60 on: November 06, 2018, 19:43:48 »
She also said she did not write (author) the accusation letter. Who did?

My understanding is that Ford told some other people/friends and one of them leaked it to the media.
"Leave one wolf alive, and the sheep are never safe."

Arya Stark

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -7995.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 282,737
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,676
    • Army.ca
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #61 on: November 07, 2018, 10:58:25 »
My understanding is that Ford told some other people/friends and one of them leaked it to the media.

You'll want to watch the committee hearings on that one. While it's still uncertain who leaked it, there may be evidence that Feinstein staffer Heather Sawyer leaked Ford’s letter to the media in violation of Senate Rule 29(5).

Now that the liberals control the House, we'll have to see whether they form a committee to investigate the leak. I'm guessing no, but that's a guess.

I have a feeling this will just quietly go away and be forgotten. The originators and enablers got the mileage they wanted out of the bogus testimony and false sexual allegations. Ford and the others are of no account to them now. Cast to the curb, so to speak, having served their purpose.
Corruption in politics doesn't scare me.
What scares me is how comfortable people are doing nothing about it.

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 100,950
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,207
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #62 on: November 07, 2018, 14:56:09 »
This is the Senate inquiry (GOP), not the House of Representations (now Dems). Don't thing this will go away as two accusers, and one lawyer so far have been referred to the DOJ/FBI. Other referrals in progress by Senator Grassley.
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -7995.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 282,737
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,676
    • Army.ca
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #63 on: November 07, 2018, 18:02:27 »
This is the Senate inquiry (GOP), not the House of Representations (now Dems). Don't thing this will go away as two accusers, and one lawyer so far have been referred to the DOJ/FBI. Other referrals in progress by Senator Grassley.

I wasn't aware that the GOP had started a special committee to look into these false allegations. I didn't think they would be doing it while an active DOJ/FBI investigation is ongoing. The Senate Committee that this fell out of was the Confirmation Hearing for Kavanaugh. He's confirmed, that's over.

If I've got my wire crossed, please point me in the right direction. Tanks!
Corruption in politics doesn't scare me.
What scares me is how comfortable people are doing nothing about it.

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 91,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,375
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #64 on: November 08, 2018, 17:32:24 »
There is no special committee.  Grassley is chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which held the hearings.

Which DOJ/FBI investigation do you mean?  The referrals have nothing to do with Mueller's investigation.

What does the hearing being over have to do with not potentially prosecuting people for making false allegations?
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -7995.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 282,737
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,676
    • Army.ca
Re: Kavanaugh - Is corroboration for sexual assault required?
« Reply #65 on: November 09, 2018, 13:27:07 »
There is no special committee.  Grassley is chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which held the hearings.

Which DOJ/FBI investigation do you mean?  The referrals have nothing to do with Mueller's investigation.

What does the hearing being over have to do with not potentially prosecuting people for making false allegations?

Okay. If you say so. I'll try digest your reply later, it's just not making sense to me right now, especially how you got Mueller involved.

Corruption in politics doesn't scare me.
What scares me is how comfortable people are doing nothing about it.