Woman accuses Kavanaugh of sexual assault decades ago

[TitanTiger 20,511]

3 minutes ago, AUDub said:

One cannot simply let a criticism of any member of one's own tribe to go unchecked.

[auburn41 492]

14 minutes ago, AUDub said:

This twerp

thinks your friend is part of the problem. 

He should know.  He was falsely accused.

 I learned this the hard way a number of years ago when I was accused of felony rape by a woman I had literally never even seen. 

She was a certified public accountant in Indiana and upstanding member of her community and also apparently delusional. Her claims were grotesque but they were highly specific. The assault she said took place in the back room of a restaurant in Louisville on a specific day at around 10:30 p.m. 
She included loads of graphic and horrifying detail. It was stomach- turning. 

And, yet, none of it, one of it was true. I spent the next two months trying to stay out of jail. I couldn't tell my children because I knew they would be ashamed. I couldn't tell my employer because I knew I would be fired immediately. I spoke only to lawyers and I paid them spent a fortune. I took a polygraph exam from the former head polygrapher at the FBI. I never stopped worrying that the charges would become public and destroy my life. 

Everyone accused of sex offense did something wrong. Everybody knows that. 

And I knew no one would believe otherwise. This isn't a defense of sexual harassment or misbehavior obviously. It is just a reminder that real life is complicated. More complicated than sermonizing on Twitter. Sometimes the mob is wrong. Sometimes the innocent are crushed. That's always a tragedy, no matter what the charge is. 
......https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/11/30/tucker_carlson_not_every_accuser_tells_the_truth_i_should_know.html

[TitanTiger 20,511]

54 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Yep we need to exercise extreme caution too. Many INNOCENT men have had their lives ruined. That is equally unjust. 

While I certainly agree that it's equally unjust, it is not equally frequent.  Over and over, the statistics show that false accusations are exceedingly rare.  And when there are false accusations, there are usually "tells."  The accusers tend to be of a type:
 

Quote

When one looks at a series of fabricated sexual assaults, on the other hand, patterns immediately begin to emerge. The most striking of these is that, almost invariably, adult false accusers who persist in pursuing charges have a previous history of bizarre fabrications or criminal fraud. Indeed, they’re often criminals whose family and friends are also criminals; broken people trapped in chaotic lives.

Crystal Mangum, the accuser in the Duke lacrosse case, was the archetypal false accuser. She had previously reported another brutal rape/kidnapping in which no one was ever charged. She had a previous felony conviction, and she ultimately went to prison for an unrelated crime (in her case, murdering her boyfriend). She had trouble keeping her stripping job because the combination of drugs she was on—including both anti-depressants and methadone—made her keep falling asleep at work. Tragically, she seems to have genuinely suffered sexual abuse as a child—another feature that often appears in adult false accusers.

https://qz.com/980766/the-truth-about-false-rape-accusations/

So while in principle I agree, I think that immediately responding in this way implies that the risk of an innocent man being accused and the risk of being dismissive of sexual assaults that really happened are the same and they just aren't.

[AUDub 11,184]

17 minutes ago, auburn41 said:

He should know.  He was falsely accused.

 I learned this the hard way a number of years ago when I was accused of felony rape by a woman I had literally never even seen. 

She was a certified public accountant in Indiana and upstanding member of her community and also apparently delusional. Her claims were grotesque but they were highly specific. The assault she said took place in the back room of a restaurant in Louisville on a specific day at around 10:30 p.m. 
She included loads of graphic and horrifying detail. It was stomach- turning. 

And, yet, none of it, one of it was true. I spent the next two months trying to stay out of jail. I couldn't tell my children because I knew they would be ashamed. I couldn't tell my employer because I knew I would be fired immediately. I spoke only to lawyers and I paid them spent a fortune. I took a polygraph exam from the former head polygrapher at the FBI. I never stopped worrying that the charges would become public and destroy my life. 

Everyone accused of sex offense did something wrong. Everybody knows that. 

And I knew no one would believe otherwise. This isn't a defense of sexual harassment or misbehavior obviously. It is just a reminder that real life is complicated. More complicated than sermonizing on Twitter. Sometimes the mob is wrong. Sometimes the innocent are crushed. That's always a tragedy, no matter what the charge is. 
......https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/11/30/tucker_carlson_not_every_accuser_tells_the_truth_i_should_know.html

Isn't that a different subject? 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

1 minute ago, TitanTiger said:

While I certainly agree that it's equally unjust, it is not equally frequent.  Over and over, the statistics show that false accusations are exceedingly rare.  And when there are false accusations, there are usually "tells."  The accusers tend to be of a type:
 

So while in principle I agree, I think that immediately responding in this way implies that the risk of an innocent man being accused and the risk of being dismissive of sexual assaults that really happened are the same and they just aren't.

It does not imply anything about which one happens more. I also think it irrelevant (or rather, minute) to consider which one happens more because both are equally unjust. It is a case by case issue, where all surrounding circumstances should be taken into account. That "statistics show false accusations are rare" (whatever rare means), does not undermine the notion I asserted. 

Probably talking past each other. Bottom line, I was not comparing or insinuating quantity. Hopefully this clarifies. 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

2 minutes ago, AUDub said:

Isn't that a different subject? 

ahhhh, context puts it in a new perspective eh? 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

20 minutes ago, auburn41 said:

He should know.  He was falsely accused.

 I learned this the hard way a number of years ago when I was accused of felony rape by a woman I had literally never even seen. 

She was a certified public accountant in Indiana and upstanding member of her community and also apparently delusional. Her claims were grotesque but they were highly specific. The assault she said took place in the back room of a restaurant in Louisville on a specific day at around 10:30 p.m. 
She included loads of graphic and horrifying detail. It was stomach- turning. 

And, yet, none of it, one of it was true. I spent the next two months trying to stay out of jail. I couldn't tell my children because I knew they would be ashamed. I couldn't tell my employer because I knew I would be fired immediately. I spoke only to lawyers and I paid them spent a fortune. I took a polygraph exam from the former head polygrapher at the FBI. I never stopped worrying that the charges would become public and destroy my life. 

Everyone accused of sex offense did something wrong. Everybody knows that. 

And I knew no one would believe otherwise. This isn't a defense of sexual harassment or misbehavior obviously. It is just a reminder that real life is complicated. More complicated than sermonizing on Twitter. Sometimes the mob is wrong. Sometimes the innocent are crushed. That's always a tragedy, no matter what the charge is. 
......https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/11/30/tucker_carlson_not_every_accuser_tells_the_truth_i_should_know.html

WOW. Thanks for sharing

[homersapien 11,453]

Brett Kavanaugh’s slippery answers about high school partying matter

He’s asking us to believe his denial of a sexual assault accusation, but he keeps displaying a lack of honesty.

Dogged by an accusation of a sexual assault in high school and pressed to defend his character, Brett Kavanaugh went on Fox News with a curious strategy. Instead of owning up to his high school drinking habits, he told what appear to be lies.

Kavanaugh insinuated he never drank when he was underage, saying on Fox that when he was a senior the “drinking age was 18, and yes, the seniors were legal and had beer there.”

Not only is this not true with regard to the legal drinking age in Maryland at the time, it’s extremely hard to square with the portrait he otherwise paints of himself as a hard-partying kid. Thirty-five years ago he seemed to have joked in his yearbook about being the treasurer of the Keg City Club, and in 2015 he quipped that “what happens at Georgetown Prep stays at Georgetown Prep.”

Obviously if we disqualified people from high office for having engaged in underage drinking or some youthful drunken antics, we’d have a very hard time staffing the government. The mere fact that Kavanaugh drank to excess in high school is not relevant to whether he is fit to serve on the Supreme Court. And it certainly doesn’t prove that he sexually assaulted anyone.

But it does factor into the question at the heart of this saga: Should we take Kavanaugh’s word or that of his accusers? Kavanaugh has consistently had trouble being honest with both Congress and the public. That he would choose to say things that aren’t true, yet again, just makes it harder to trust any of his claims.

In the context of a friendly Fox News interview, he knew perfectly well that he wouldn’t be pressed hard on this or any other contradiction. By lying about his drinking he managed to present an image as an all-around Boy Scout directly to his party’s base, including evangelical Christians, who he needs to get his confirmation jammed through.

But to any observer with evidence from outside the Fox News bubble, he simply seems like a liar.......

Read the rest (and there's plenty there) at:

https://www.vox.com/2018/9/26/17901076/brett-kavanaugh-drinking-high-school-sexual-assault-allegations

 

[AUDub 11,184]

12 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

ahhhh, context puts it in a new perspective eh? 

He faced a false accusation, therefore, victims of assault/rape have an obligation to come forward, often in conditions that will be produce very little in the way of a satisfactory outcome and in a system that has been and in some ways remains hostile to them doing so? 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

7 minutes ago, AUDub said:

He faced a false accusation, therefore, victims of assault/rape have an obligation to come forward, often in conditions that will be produce very little in the way of a satisfactory outcome and in a system that has been and in some ways remains hostile to them doing so? 

His personal experiences shed light on his view. It is called "cultural variance." It is important for us to consider what one has experienced before we write them off as cruel or heartless. Does not mean he is right, but it is a guide to help us in understanding why he feels that way. I have to do that with my immigration clients all the time. This drastically changes the idea accompanying your initial post. It is ok. You probably did not know he was falsely accused. 

[TitanTiger 20,511]

31 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

It does not imply anything about which one happens more. I also think it irrelevant (or rather, minute) to consider which one happens more because both are equally unjust. It is a case by case issue, where all surrounding circumstances should be taken into account. That "statistics show false accusations are rare" (whatever rare means), does not undermine the notion I asserted. 

Probably talking past each other. Bottom line, I was not comparing or insinuating quantity. Hopefully this clarifies. 

We might be.  But while you may not have intentionally meant to say anything regarding frequency or the relative risk of committing one wrong vs the other, I do think that an immediate response of this nature implies such a thing.  It's like talking about the importance of childhood vaccines and the diseases they've eradicated or greatly reduced the spread of, and someone immediately chiming in with anecdotes of people who had really bad reactions or severe complications from side effects of a vaccine.  Yes, it happens.  Yes it's real.  But the risk of that happening vs the norm of the vaccine doing exactly what it was created to do aren't comparable and really don't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath.  They shouldn't be given equal weight of concern.

As it pertains to sexual assault, the stats should tell us that overwhelmingly, we should take the accusations seriously and that we should treat the alleged victims seriously.  Not immediately trying to poke holes, not immediately questioning motives, and certainly not quickly dismissing the accusations because they don't have an eyewitness or a video recordings of it and plowing ahead with whatever we had been planning to do for the accused (such as grant them a position of extremely great power, prestige, influence and responsibility).  We should stop.  We should listen and take the accusations seriously.  We should allow for some time to see if other victims come forward or if people can corroborate aspects of the story.  We should subject the accused and the accuser to more questions.  We should NOT be in a rush to do anything and we should NOT start with a default setting of doubt and disbelief.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

2 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

We might be.  But while you may not have intentionally meant to say anything regarding frequency or the relative risk of committing one wrong vs the other, I do think that an immediate response of this nature implies such a thing.

 

3 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

and someone immediately chiming

Not sure what you mean by "immediate response." Time passed between your post and my comment. 

I am sorry this triggers you but I stand by my statement. I read these cases all of the time. It happens a lot. Take it or leave it, that's fine. 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

7 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

They shouldn't be given equal weight of concern.

And I vehemently disagree with this statement. More frequent "repetition" one way or the other should not abrogate equal concern. 

[AUDub 11,184]

14 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

His personal experiences shed light on his view. It is called "cultural variance." It is important for us to consider what one has experienced before we write them off as cruel or heartless. Does not mean he is right, but it is a guide to help us in understanding why he feels that way. I have to do that with my immigration clients all the time.

That's a fancy way of saying non sequitur.

Quote

This drastically changes the idea accompanying your initial post. It is ok. You probably did not know he was falsely accused.  

No, because he's still playing his part trying to discredit them now that they have come forward. I maintain that he's a twerp.

"They should have come forward!" With all the support and positivity our current crop of "women who report" are facing? Yeah, no. I'm not going to criticize any woman for not reporting when they believe it may actually do more harm than good.

[TitanTiger 20,511]

1 minute ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Not sure what you mean by "immediate response." Time passed between your post and my comment. 

I'm not sure message board time stamps are the best way to nitpick what I'm saying.  It was 2 hours.  That's fairly immediate.  And besides, I was talking about more than just your response right here.  I was making a bigger statement about how these things go when a powerful man gets accused of sexual misconduct.  Invariably one of the very first responses to it are things like accusations of being paid, expressions of suspicion about motive, objections to the timing, and general doubt and disbelief that she's telling the truth.  It's a response that isn't warranted based on what we know about false accusations statistically.  That's what I'm talking about when I say immediate response.

 

1 minute ago, NolaAuTiger said:

I am sorry this triggers you but I stand by my statement. I read these cases all of the time. It happens a lot. Take it or leave it, that's fine. 

Look, we can have a good conversation on this, or you can be an ass and try to make flippant and petty remarks.  But if it's the latter, I'm not participating with you and you can find another thread to post on.

[homersapien 11,453]

1 minute ago, NolaAuTiger said:

And I vehemently disagree with this statement. More frequent "repetition" one way or the other should not abrogate equal concern. 

I think Titan was referring to such instances in the aggregate, not on an individual basis.  His analogy of inoculations was a pretty good one.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

1 minute ago, TitanTiger said:

Look, we can have a good conversation on this, or you can be an ass and try to make flippant and petty remarks.  But if it's the latter, I'm not participating with you and you can find another thread to post on.

Meant no disrespect. Just thought it may have triggered you. Appears you don't particularly agree with my assessment. No harm though. All good on my end. 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

I think Titan was referring to such instances in the aggregate, not on an individual basis.  His analogy of inoculations was a pretty good one.

I know what he was referring to. Thanks for your input

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

5 minutes ago, AUDub said:

That's a fancy way of saying non sequitur.

You're shooting the messenger, bud. But ok

5 minutes ago, AUDub said:

No, because he's still playing his part trying to discredit them now that they have come forward. I maintain that he's a twerp.

"They should have come forward!" With all the support and positivity our current crop of "women who report" are facing? Yeah, no. I'm not going to criticize any woman for not reporting when they believe it may actually do more harm than good.

Again, not trying to make you agree or disagree with him. Just understand cultural variation. It is a very valuable attribute. Anyways, cheers

[TitanTiger 20,511]

3 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

And I vehemently disagree with this statement. More frequent "repetition" one way or the other should not abrogate equal concern. 

Sure it should.  I give way more weight to the benefits of a vaccine than I do the real but rare potential side effects.  My first response to an allegation of rape or sexual assault should be to take the victim's claims seriously, not to jump to the defense of the accused or start doubting her motives.  Taking them seriously doesn't mean that I immediately judge the accused guilty either.  It's actually a position of neutrality.  But given what I know about such accusations it means my primary concern and what I give most weight to is to not dismiss or downplay the accusation, not firing back with talk of the accused's merits or questioning the victim's memories or motives.

[homersapien 11,453]

7 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

I know what he was referring to. Thanks for your input

Your response certainly didn't reflect that. 

Sounded to me like you were arguing the negative personal effects of an individual being falsely accused merits equal consideration to the negative personal effects on an individual who is a victim of sexual assault.  That's true enough, but irrelevant to the actual point.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

Just now, homersapien said:

Your response certainly didn't reflect that. 

Sounded to me like you were arguing the negative personal effects of an individual being falsely accused merits equal consideration to the negative personal effects to an individual who is a victim of sexual assault.

Maybe to you, it did't reflect that. 

No. I wouldn't camouflage my positions in colorful rhetoric. I meant exactly what I meant. We should be concerned, both are equally unjust. 

[AUDub 11,184]

Wouldn't you know it, Avenatti has a witness. Let's look closer...

[homersapien 11,453]

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/questions-fox-news-should-have-asked-brett-kavanaugh/571294/

Questions Fox News Should Have Asked Brett Kavanaugh

.........Because Kavanaugh didn’t want to risk that outcome, he sought the most sympathetic outlet, Fox News, and got gentle treatment.

If, as reported, Kavanaugh had prepped for days, surely he was prepared to answer more pointed questions. Such as:

• Is this your high-school yearbook page? There are reports that this slang, “FFFFFFourth of July,” describes acts of violence against women. Does it? If not, I’d love to give you a chance to clear that up now. What does the slang on this page stand for? Why did you include this slang in your yearbook?
• You say you may have met one accuser, Christine Blasey Ford. Did you know her, or not? Surely you’ve spent a good amount of time thinking about this. What reason do you have for equivocating? If you did know her, how?
• Your high-school buddy Mark Judge wrote in his 1997 memoir that a “Bart O’Kavanaugh” passed out drunk and vomited in a car. Was that character based on you? You say you spent your high-school years solely dedicated to studying and doing athletics. Where did Judge and his admitted binge drinking fit into that picture?
• You suggested that you did things in high school that make you cringe or cause regret. What did you do in high school that makes you cringe now?
• You’ve said repeatedly you never committed sexual assault. How do you define sexual assault?
• Do you believe adults should be held accountable for their actions as teenagers? If not, as a judge, do you think we should release the roughly 53,000 people under the age of 17 currently incarcerated in the United States for actions they took as minors?

There was another missed opportunity, one that goes to a larger question at the heart of this controversy. Kavanaugh has described himself as a victim of character assassination and a smear campaign. He’s said these allegations are “a threat to any man or woman who wishes to serve our country.” As a judge, a veteran of the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal, and now a man who stands accused of terrible acts, how does he think allegations of sexual assault should be handled when leveled against our nation’s leaders? What has he learned in the 20 years since he wrote those probing questions for Clinton?

Again, Fox News didn’t go there. And MacCallum didn’t point out that 20 years ago, Kavanaugh wrote despairingly that the investigative process was leaving Lewinsky’s life in “shambles.” He worried that her well-being was getting “lost in the shuffle.” How does he think we—the media, politicians, law enforcement—can ensure that Ford doesn’t suffer the same fate?

Full disclosure, I knew Brett Kavanaugh when I was a reporter covering the Bush White House for ABC News. I still know several of his close friends who find these allegations impossible to believe. The same friends have described him for years as destined for the Supreme Court. I hope he answers more probing questions in more detail on Thursday. Destiny is about the future. First, he has to deal with his past.

 

[AUDub 11,184]

12 minutes ago, AUDub said:

Wouldn't you know it, Avenatti has a witness. Let's look closer...

Oof