Marc Thiessen: the fate of Kavanaugh - the prosecutor Rachel Mitchell can be the key person in the whole...
Marc Thiessen: the fate of Kavanaugh - the prosecutor Rachel Mitchell can be the key person in the whole fight
The decision by the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Charles Grassley, that Arizona sex crimes prosecutor Rachel Mitchell question Christine Blasey Ford may well be remembered as a brilliant, and possibly very important, option.
No doubt, allowing Mitchell to ask questions instead of Republican senators having a defensive purpose, avoiding the spectacle of a group of old and white men publicly questioning a woman who claims to be a victim of sexual abuse. But Mitchell's methodical and genial approach left many supporters of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh deeply frustrated, and some complained that Mitchell was "not putting a glove" on Ford.
That opinion is incorrect. First, the audience for Mitchell's questions was not the media or the general public. It was the three Republican senators who will determine the fate of Judge Kavanaugh: Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Jeff Flake of Arizona. And it turns out that Mitchell's orderly questioning actually got a lot of information that undermined Ford's case against Kavanaugh. This was not obvious during the hearing, because Mitchell could not deliver a summary. But he was able to do it later, first during a closed-door meeting of Republican senators and then in a memo, explaining why, based on his quarter of a century of experience in prosecuting sexual crimes, no "reasonable prosecutor" "I would bring this. Case based on evidence before the Committee. "
For starters, Mitchell explains how Ford "did not offer a coherent explanation of when the alleged assault occurred" or his age when it happened, and how "his explanation of who was at the party has been inconsistent." For example, Mitchell notes that Ford included Patrick "PJ" Smyth on the polygraph and in his July 6 text to a Post reporter, but "she did not include Leland Keyser even though they are good friends. Leland Keyser should have been more memorable than PJ Smyth's. "
Ford has "no recollection of the key details of the night in question, details that could help corroborate his account," Mitchell writes. Ford does not remember who invited her to the meeting, how she found out, how she got there or where that house was located with some specificity. "The most important thing," writes Mitchell, "does not remember how he came back from the party to his house." His inability to remember this detail raises important questions ... Since all this happened before cell phones, he organized a trip. It would not have been easy. " Also, observes Mitchell, Ford "testified that her friend Leland, apparently the only girl at the party, did not continue with Dr. Ford after the party to ask why he had suddenly disappeared." This seems very unlikely.
And, as Mitchell demonstrates, Ford's inconsistencies are not limited to the events of three decades ago. For example, Ford delayed the hearing because he said that his symptoms prevented him from flying from California to Washington, but later he admitted, when questioning that he flew to the east coast "at least once a year to visit his family" and that he has flown to Hawaii. , French Polynesia and Costa Rica for hobbies and vacations.
In addition, Mitchell notes that Ford also stated that he was not "clear" that Sen. Charles Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, had offered to send investigators from the committee to interview her in California. Either this statement under oath was not true or her lawyers did not share with her the offer of Grassley, which is a serious violation of the rules of professional conduct of the American Bar Association.
Mitchell also shows that "Dr. Ford struggled to remember his interactions" with The Post, who wrote that she provided "portions" of her therapist's notes to a reporter. But in his testimony, Ford could not remember if he showed The Post complete or partial notes of the therapist or his own summary of those notes.
He could not remember if he took a polygraph the day of his grandmother's funeral or the next day. I was not sure if it was recorded on video or recorded during the polygraph. He did not explain how he knew how to call the receptionist in his congressman's office, but could not figure out how to get in touch with his senator, Dianne Feinstein, the highest ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Ford supporters say it is unfair to dismiss their testimony, because victims of sexual assault often have trouble remembering key details. Fair enough. But if your memory is the only evidence against Kavanaugh, then inconsistencies are important. And without corroboration, senators can not trust their imperfect memories alone, no matter how understanding the witness she was.
!function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s)
{if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function(){n.callMethod?
n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)};
if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n;n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';
n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0;
t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];
s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script',
'https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js');
fbq('init', '369524843414444');
fbq('track', 'PageView');
.
SOURCE LINK ERESVIRAL.COM https://www.beviral.online
Comentarios
Publicar un comentario