Search
Archives
Categories

Let’s imagine a situation where you’re accused of committing a heinous crime. Further, let’s think that you can’t cross-examine your accuser. You know that the accusation is BS. You’ve never done anything like what you’re accused of doing.

Fortunately, the Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to confront your accuser:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

It’s disturbing to know that a person can accuse you of a heinous crime, then essentially say ‘Forget it. I’ll let the accusation hang over his head but I won’t step forward so he can cross-examine me’.

Think of all the chicanery that might be perpetrated if we operated in a situation where a person can anonymously accuse another person of committing a heinous crime, then not give that person the opportunity to defend himself.

That isn’t justice. That’s giving someone the right to publicly assassinate a person’s reputation, then not give that person the opportunity to defend themselves. That isn’t fair. Unfortunately, that’s what’s happening with Judge Kavanaugh right now.

What’s most unfortunate is that it’s happening to him because Sen. Feinstein is in a tough re-election race and because Democrats don’t think that he’ll rule fairly on cases that matter most to them. They don’t have a bit of proof of that but they’re a paranoid bunch. This sums it up perfectly:

3 Responses to “What if?”

  • eric z says:

    The woman identified herself and will testify this was back in high school for both, but her allegation is Kavanaugh, drunk as a skunk, pressed himself on her and tried to undress her but was fumbling drunk and she got away. It needs scrutiny. She indicates there was a second man identified as in the room who could be put under oath.

  • Gary Gross says:

    She’ll get her day in court, much like Anita Hill. Her credibility, as well as Di-Fi’s credibility, will be challenged. The thing that I keep coming back to is the fact that this didn’t show up during Kavanaugh’s 6 previous FBI background checks. Those checks are exceptionally thorough, yet they missed this? Color me skeptical.

  • Chad Q says:

    The fact the Di Fi held onto this woman’s letter until the last possible moment tells me even she knows it’s a load of crap. The FBI knows it’s a load of crap otherwise they would have looked into it. The second man in the room has already said this is pure BS too. The woman has no idea what year it was, where she was, never told anyone about it until she was having marital troubles 20 some odd years later, etc. While all women should be taken seriously when there are claims of rape or assault, 35 years have pass and now she’s remembering things. B as in b, S as in S. Check her bank accounts for unusual deposits now and in the future.
    If Bill Clinton could become president with the trail of proven sexual assaults committed as an adult, the attorney general and governor, democrats will surely look the other way on Kavanaugh if by some chance he actually did it.

Leave a Reply