LogFAQs > #910034266

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, Database 4 ( 07.23.2018-12.31.2018 ), DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear
Topic List
Page List: 1
TopicNew statement from Cristine Ford legal team
nemu
10/05/18 9:33:05 PM
#41:


ledbowman posted...
nemu posted...
andel posted...
nemu posted...
andel posted...
nemu posted...
VipaGTS posted...
"was there a witness"...

How is this a defense? How many people who commit sexual assault or rape invite witnesses with them?How many victims know to invite a witness with them? this shit usually happens in private...

It's not just a lack of a witness to the crime, but to any single aspect of the story. She has yet to have anyone even put them at a party together, let alone in a bedroom. This is on top of having nothing else to show besides dumb stuff from decades later that is not proof of a crime. If you have literally no proof, it's he-said, she-said, and it needs to default to innocent in that case. That will really suck for victims with no evidence, but we cannot go on the word of one person without a shred of evidence.


she passed a polygraph and has documentation that this happened from years ago. stop defending a sexual predator. just like you did with trump, just like you did with roy moore

Polygraph tests are complete and absolute bunk. She has documentation of talking to a therapist years later. If I got and talk to a therapist about being felt up by Mike Tyson, that does not make it true.


she has actual facts to back up her allegation. just because you want to mindlessly shill for the worst type of people doesnt mean you have any kind of coherent argument here

She has her sworn statement. The sworn statements of people who she told decades later. The polygraph test. That's all the has been provided. None of it proves anything. Say you believe her regardless if you want, but do not claim any of that is actual legitimate evidence of a crime. I don't give a shit about Kavanaugh. If it turns out he's guilty, I could not care less. I only care about this idea that this woman should be believed despite how much of a circus this whole thing is.

It's not proof but it is evidence. People keep intentionally conflating these two things to make a bogus point that she has nothing to stand on.

No, you just don't seem to realize when people say she "has no evidence" that they're saying she "has no [credible] evidence [that would actually prove guilt]." Any time someone explains that to you, you just close your eyes, cover your ears, and keep chanting "evidence, evidence, evidence" as if it means something.
... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List
Page List: 1