this was not a criminal trial but a hearing for purposes of approval of a high court judge.
judges should be of good moral fiber as well as the other qualifications they need.
I doubt at the time the girl could have proved him guilty because it is her character that would have been on trial. that is why women used to be reluctant to come forward.
whether either of them is telling the truth we will probably never know.

__________________

WTF? Judge Kavanaugh is having his character assassinated by hear-say statements that nobody, NOBODY will substantiate.
If the weakness of the accusations were to be levied against your father or husband, would you accept them?

You doubt the accuser could have seen Kavanaugh convicted 36 years ago when they were both high school students. Gee, the chances are so much better now she forgot to file a criminal complaint.

It took prompting from a therapist for the accuser to blame Kavanaugh some 30 years after the event. Even now she begs investigators to prompt her with dates so she can narrow down the date range of the assault.

__________________
What is a 30 something year old single man with a rock in one hand and a Honduran flag in the other?

An asylum seeker.

I was answering your post where you said: Judge Brett Kavanaugh is innocent because our legal system defines that a person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. He has not been proven guilty in a court of law.


I explained this is not a court of law. And when you talked about (hypothetically) her filing a report and how it would have gone down

It wouldn't have gone down that way because her character would have been assassinated, because that is how the law treated rape accusers in the past.
Yes his character is being maligned, but mostly by all the hype over it.
The whole thing is a farce since the beginning
trump never should have chosen this guy, he should have stuck to the first list of possibilities. trump clearly thinks kavenaugh's statements concerning one event surrounding another president would mean he (kavenaugh) could miraculously give sanction to trump and save him from testifying about his own problems. the fact the right to lifers think kavenaugh will overturn rvw doesn't hurt that cause either, although it is a pipe dream.

Along comes feinstein and holds on to a letter so that this plays out closer to mid terms
then republicans hire a gal who they think will take the accuser down because she (prosecutor) has uncovered questions in other accuser claims in the past. when it gets to kavenaugh they (republican congress) decide to give speeches and pat brett on the back and sing odes to his poor plight; democrat congresspeople go on tv and tweet and gather up their little followers to fight for the right to prevent births. poor kavenaugh, though no doubt coached well, ends up looking like an azzhole, because he dances around questions. He knows if he lies now, even by omission, about anything he may be in bigger trouble some day. its a mine field but, like I said, makes him look bad.
meanwhile lets not forget the woman who certainly appears as one who did not want to testify in public.
step right up, folks; come one come all to talk about sex and politics.

__________________

So it is safe to say one is not presumed guilty, eh?

I don't care about this freak show but just to say: a person nominated for a high position anywhere has to have high moral standards (even today ) and if he was applying for CEO of red cross and people lodged a formal complaint that he had done these things, he probably would not get that job regardless of guilt or innocence. because it reflects on the company or institution.
I know it sounds crappy for the individual, but remember it is the "appearance" of immorality we are talking about here.
as I said though I don't care if he gets it or not

__________________

So by that logic.... all anyone has to do to stop ANY nomination is make an unsubstantiated allegation. Right?

It probably needs to originate from a credible source. not a druggie or former employee or felon, but yes

__________________

But "credible" is ONLY subjective without corroborating evidence...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

As Victor Davis Hanson said in a recent interview Ford is sincere but not credible. The only certainty in her accusation is that Kavanaugh is the culprit. The follow on accusations reek of even the appearance of sincerity. In a typical perversion of the language "credible" is corrupted into the irrational belief in the so-called survivor's tale no matter the evidence.

__________________
What is a 30 something year old single man with a rock in one hand and a Honduran flag in the other?

An asylum seeker.