LogFAQs > #909506662

2) You talk about burden of proof, but don't seem all that interested in it yourself. I asked you after your last post what your basis was for calling these accusations "character smears" (a phrase you repeated in this post, in addition to calling these potential rape victims "bottom-feeders and hermit eels" in the next post), but you declined to respond.

This is your allegation, shouldn't you post some proof of it?

3) On that note, I think we can safely put the "character smear/naked political ploy" allegation to bed. Ford raised this years ago with her therapist and has produced sworn affidavits that she discussed this with multiple people years before Kavanaugh was up for a Supreme Court nomination.

4) I posted this earlier in the topic, but it bears repeating - I have not arrived at a final decision on whether or not the events ascribed to Kavanaugh took place as his accusers allege, and nor should anyone else until the full facts are known. I don't necessarily believe the women, but I don't disbelieve them either. Their allegations are serious enough to warrant further investigation to determine their veracity, which is what the senate and the FBI should be doing.

I will say that the evidence arrayed against Kavanaugh looks far more convincing than what he's mustered as a defence. If neither side produces anything more on the matter, I'd say it's far more likely that Kavanaugh is guilty than innocent (see posts 124 and 125 for my reasoning on that); that's not proof and it wouldn't be enough for me to vote him guilty if he was being charged with this and I was on the jury, but if I was in the senate it would absolutely be enough to vote against his nomination.

But just to disprove your little quip about assuming guilt over innocence, I will say that I'm not yet convinced by the third accuser. Her accusation is a much more serious allegation, to which I would expect additional corroboration in order to take it seriously (if Kavanaugh ran a "rape gang", I find it highly doubtful that absolutely no one else is coming forward to back up that story). Certainly if she was the only one accusing Kavanaugh (and assuming she's unable to produce anything else corroborating her account), I wouldn't see an issue with moving forward on the nomination.

GreenKnight127 posted...

going out of your way to defend accusations of guilt before proof of innocence

Haven't you spent most of the last few posts blathering on about how innocence can't be proved? What happened, did I change your mind?
---

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!