Outside counsel tells Republican senators 'reasonable prosecutor' would not bring Ford case...
Last edited Mon Oct 1, 2018, 08:03 AM - Edit history (2)
Source: CNN
Outside counsel tells Republican senators 'reasonable prosecutor' would not bring Ford case against Kavanaugh
By Ariane de Vogue, CNN Supreme Court Reporter
Updated 1103 GMT (1903 HKT) October 1, 2018
Washington (CNN)In a memorandum to Republican senators, Rachel Mitchell says a "reasonable prosecutor" would not bring a case against Brett Kavanaugh based on Christine Blasey Ford's sexual assault allegation given the evidence presented to the Judiciary Committee.
But Mitchell, the sex crimes prosecutor hired by Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans who questioned Ford last Thursday, also notes, "A Senate confirmation hearing is not a trial, especially not a prosecution."
Mitchell cites inconsistencies in Ford's statements to the committee, The Washington Post, and her therapist about the alleged assault, which Ford alleges took place when she and Kavanaugh were in high school.
Mitchell also notes the lack of corroboration of Ford's account, including recalling details that could back her story.
Read more: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/09/30/politics/rachel-mitchell-kavanaugh-ford/index.html
In memo, outside prosecutor argues why she would not bring criminal charges against Kavanaugh
By Seung Min Kim
September 30 at 11:07 PM
The outside prosecutor Senate Republicans hired to lead the questioning in last week's hearing about the sexual assault allegations against Brett M. Kavanaugh is arguing in a new memo why she would not bring criminal charges against the Supreme Court nominee.
In the five-page memo, obtained by The Washington Post, Rachel Mitchell outlines more than half a dozen reasons why she thinks the testimony of Christine Blasey Ford -- who has accused Kavanaugh of assaulting her at a house in suburban Maryland when they were teenagers in the early 1980s -- has some key inconsistencies.
"A 'he said, she said' case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that," Mitchell writes in the memo, sent Sunday night to all Senate Republicans. "Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them."
Mitchell continued: "For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the [Senate Judiciary] Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard."
The memo is likely to prompt significant pushback from Democratic senators, who have argued that Ford is not on trial and that Kavanaugh is merely interviewing for a job. But the memo is clearly aimed at assuaging the concerns of a handful of GOP senators who are on the fence about whether to vote to confirm Kavanaugh and are considering whose story -- Ford's or Kavanaugh's -- to believe.
more
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-memo-outside-prosecutor-argues-why-she-would-not-bring-criminal-charges-against-kavanaugh/2018/09/30/4e096654-c520-11e8-9158-09630a6d8725_story.html
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)to make it sound like it was is pure bullshit
Midnight Writer
(21,753 posts)beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)sexual abuse by kavanaugh in same time period, I suspect her opinion on whether or not to prosecute would be different.
PaulX2
(2,032 posts)Like everyone else has done.
Tom Rinaldo
(22,912 posts)I agree that it might be hard to convict based on the evidence available, but even that is uncertain without being certain that none of the potential witnesses would flip on Kavanaugh after really being grilled. That has not yet happened. The "investigation" to date has merely been a fig leaf.
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)FreepFryer
(7,077 posts)...after she screwed up and asked Kavanaugh real questions.
If she had been hired by Donald Trump, I think the probability of that would approach certainty, but I doubt the rest of the GOP have much more integrity.
-- Mal
Farmer-Rick
(10,169 posts)We used a Judas goat with our sheep. It's a trained goat that leads our skittish sheep to where we want them to be. It leads our other goats around too. Frequently it leads them onto trailers where we then take them to the slaughter house. Some slaughter houses also use Judas goats. The animal betrays the sheep and goats by leading them into danger.
Ms. Mitchell is betraying American women by mischaracterizing a situation that could be dangerous for all women....what she was hired to do..... or more likely what she and many other women are trained to do.
Nitram
(22,800 posts)This is a job interview, not a trial. There has been more than enough corroborating evidence to confidently vote NO on Kavanaugh.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)laserhaas
(7,805 posts)K&R
WiseElder
(132 posts)This was a job interview.
turbinetree
(24,695 posts)that were accused of sexual assault in 2015..............Pages 44 and 45
https://www.azdps.gov/sites/default/files/media/Crime_in_Arizona_2015.pdf
RAPE
DEFINITION
Rape is defined as penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or
object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.
Assaults or attempts to commit forcible rape are also included; however, statutory rape (without
force) and other sex offenses are not counted in this category.
2015 SUMMARY
There were 2,731 rapes reported during 2015.
Rape accounted for 1.2 percent of the total index offenses and 11.1 percent of violent
crimes.
November recorded the highest number with 250, while December recorded the lowest
with 184.
Of the total rapes reported, rape accounted for 2,509 offenses and attempted rape
accounted for 222 offenses.
The total value of property stolen amounted to $41,640.
ARRESTS / CLEARANCES
A total of 276 persons were arrested in 2015.
Adults accounted for 227 arrests and juveniles accounted for 49 arrests.
Of those persons arrested, 81.5 percent were White, 11.2 percent were Black, 6.5 percent
were American Indian/Alaskan Native, 0.3 percent were Asian and 0.3 percent were Pacific
Islander.
Hispanics accounted for 33.6 percent of the arrests.
There were 583 clearances for rape reported in 2015. Juveniles represented 15.9 percent
of this total.
And then to add insult to your claim of partisan ship............................this is what your county did................
"Under the Obama administration, the Justice Department investigated policing in Maricopa County, Arizona, where Joe Arpaio was sheriff. Amid the investigation, Frontline reports, the DOJ said the sheriffs office admitted that it had failed to properly investigate more than 400 cases of sexual assault and child molestation over a three-year period in 2007. In many of the cases, the sexual assault victims were undocumented Latinos or their children. (Two months ago President Trump pardoned Joe Arpaio, who had been found guilty of criminal contempt for the tactics he used to police Latinx people in the county.)"
https://www.thenation.com/article/sexual-assault-when-youre-on-the-margins-can-we-all-say-metoo/
So your track record of hypocrisy speaks for itself.................
That is all...............................it says basically that you didn't give a shit, if a person was assaulted and of color...............your organization said FU.........................to over 400 cases.................so Lady lets talk about your track record, just like your wanna be justice Kavanaugh......
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)criminal conviction as the Republicans are trying to make people swallow.
Kavanaugh's proven unfit and disqualified himself by perjuring himself in the hearing over something as paltry as what the words in his yearbook mean. He displayed profound disregard for the principles of our judicial system itself by trying to subvert the process rather than protect and commit to cooperating to his fullest and best.
turbinetree
(24,695 posts)and what is really classic is what John Oliver reported and if you listen to what this jerk said about the 6;37 mark with the young woman's name's he says "Christine", so in my humble opinion he knew her and he called her up to say lets go partying at this house................was it Christine Ford?
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)up with all his lies and slips?
turbinetree
(24,695 posts)sexual predator is going to limit who the FBI are going to speak with, I tell you what when I had my back ground for my security clearance, they went back.............................all the way back....................
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Of course, people are passionately on both sides, but in addition to outrage at what's happening in a watching populace, we still have those senators who used their leverage to insist on investigation to begin with. Hopefully, if it's too limited they'll refuse to vote and the investigation will have to be expanded.
burrowowl
(17,641 posts)turbinetree
(24,695 posts)the lying drunk did say "christine" going to the parties
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,001 posts)malthaussen
(17,194 posts)Mr Kavanaugh's antics while 17 years old are not really relevant to his suitability for a seat on the Court, so whether a prosecutor would bring charges on a 35 year old crime that is possibly already defunct due to the Statute of Limitations (which is very complicated in Maryland) is of zero interest.
What is relevant is his behavior when confronted with the accusation, his record of perjury, and his unsuitable juridical record. Any of these would disqualify him from consideration, in a reasonable world.
I note, too, that a prosecutor only brings charges when he thinks he has a reasonable chance of an indictment and conviction. The chances of these frequently have little to do with the matter of fact (did the act happen, or not), and more to do with whether the prosecutor thinks he has a reasonable chance of making a case. Based on the ridiculous "hearing" in the Senate committee, I can't imagine a prosecutor going forward. And I doubt the "investigation" that the WH is touting will change matters much.
-- Mal
moriah
(8,311 posts)And "drunken antics" that include attempted sexual assault or exposing your penis to a female fellow student at Yale, attempting to put it in her face DO matter, because if we say they don't we are giving license to the whole "boys will be boys" view. Drunken non-criminal antics wouldn't matter, except for creating opportunities for Kavanaugh to lie more.
Of course when I reported the female DA didn't want to risk her conviction records, despite electronic evidence. So it is completely irrelevant that in a case hearing just from two witnesses, and it being out of statute, they'd say something like that.
cstanleytech
(26,291 posts)be on SCOTUS still.
Frankly after his testimony I would say he is not fit to be on but he could always go on to host a new Court tv show.
agingdem
(7,849 posts)I'm 70 years old...this is what I remember...please check for "inconsistencies"... July 12, 1963 ... the day I got my driver's license... walked out of Baskin Robbins.. one scoop of jamoca ice cream in a cup for me and a pint of pistachio for my family back home, as I opened the car door someone shoved me face down onto the front seat, straddled me and was ripping my shorts and underwear.. I tried to scream but he pushed my face further into the seat..I was half in half out of the car....I did manage to get my hand on the steering wheel and blasted the horn...within seconds the guy was off me, and I turned around to see who it was...I knew him...he was a grade ahead of me and lived within walking distance of my house...did I tell anyone? no and yes...my mother was a Holocaust survivor and children of survivors learn very early to not make waves ...I did tell my male high school counselor..his comment (and I quote):a teenage boy just having some fun with a pretty girl...you'll get used to it and like it"...inconsistencies?...many decades later I still remember his smell, his breath, his hands, the feel of his lowered pants, and I remember his face...always..years later I heard that he had died in a motorcycle accident and I cried..that piece of garbage took away my innocence...so when I heard the degenerates on the committee say "but it was so long ago" my response: no you assholes it was yesterday! and to you Ms. Mitchell you can take your "inconsistencies" and shove it!
forgotmylogin
(7,528 posts)...and doesn't have the temperament and impartiality the job he is nominated for requires.
Everyone has a past. He lied about his then had a temper tantrum in front of Congress, displaying partisan bias. He cannot handle pressure and cannot remain impartial.
I don't think Ford *wants* to convict him of anything and would rather move on with her life, but cannot remain silent when someone who did this to her is being handed tremendous powers to control how women are treated legally.
I've said before - My neighbor can have any opinions he likes. If he's a racist, that's fine so long as he doesn't scream it in the backyard so it affects other people. When he becomes my boss or a politician where his opinions *will* inform what he says in public and affect the lives of other people, then there's a problem.
karynnj
(59,503 posts)I am absolutely not surprised that no case would be prosecuted. However, this, plus the year book, plus the Yale yearbook and many people's comments show that for at least those 4 years, he was an obnoxious bully, who drank too much and disrespected SOME women. On the latter, note that he arrogantly says he did not socialize with women from her private school - and listed some girls schools he considered "fit" to socialize with. That comment does not help him -- instead it defines Dr Ford as someone he was could disrespect. (I wonder what school Renate went to)
uponit7771
(90,336 posts)... the city she works for.
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,686 posts)how can she come to that conclusion before there has been an investigation?
RhodeIslandOne
(5,042 posts)....didn't like.