LogFAQs > #909384105

GreenKnight127 posted...

So my question would be: Why is your potential employer accusing you of anything at all? What is their basis for the accusation in the first place?

Because someone brought the accusation forward.

In this hypothetical, maybe they checked your references and something came up. Or maybe someone works there who used to work with you and said something to the person in charge of hiring. Or maybe they Googled your name and saw something online that raised questions.

How the allegation comes up really isn't all that important - once the issue has been raised, it has to be addressed, and that is even more pertinent when we're talking about someone being nominated for a lifetime position, who is almost completely immune to being fired and who will exercise authority over some 300 million people.

GreenKnight127 posted...

Some woman said something happened 35 years ago? Okay. If you are going to listen to her, will you listen to me when I say "nothing happened"? Because it sounds like her words have more merit than mine by default.

If "nothing happened, pinkie swear" is your best defence, I may not wholly believe the allegations but I'd probably err on the side of caution and see if there isn't a candidate out there who hasn't been accused of something that could come back to haunt me and my company.

On the other hand, if you can say, "I absolutely would never do something like that. Here's a list of references you can contact from the time the allegations were made, here's the number for security at the building, you have my permission to dig into my records as much as you want. I can assure you that these allegations are completely false," I would be more inclined to believe you, especially if I start digging further and find nothing that supports the allegations.

On the other hand, if your best defence is, "I was never charged with anything and you can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that something happened," I am almost immediately going to throw your resume in the trash because nothing about those words is reassuring in the slightest, regardless of the merit of the accusation.

GreenKnight127 posted...

And before there's even been a formal investigation, will there now be media headlines claiming I am a rapist?

An ALLEGED rapist. You were very clear about that distinction with the ALLEGED victims, so the same standard should apply here, no?

GreenKnight127 posted...

I kinda doubt that. Once blood is in the water, all manner of bottom-dwellers and hermit eels come out of the darkness to feed.

Sure, but you don't have to convince those people. Yeah, some people are stubborn assholes who refuse to see sense. The conservative version of that was the birther morons who insisted Obama was born in Africa, because there's no way a black American could ever become president.

Again, the burden of proof - on either side - is not "beyond a reasonable doubt"; you just need to dispel the doubt, to a reasonable degree, that the accusations have merit. If you cannot... well, I think there are plenty of other talented jurists out there who could take Mr. Kavanaugh's place who don't have sexual abuse allegations hanging over their heads; after all, both parties have - with only a few exceptions - managed that in the past.

And don't give me that "#MeToo makes women too powerful!" bullshit - if that were true and women were secretly trying to lie to undermine justices they don't like, Neil M. Gorsuch would have gone through the exact same thing; he got through his entire confirmation with nary a whisper of sexual misconduct, presumably because he has never tried to rape anyone.
---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!