37

Oh Bill!!!!!!!

41 comments, 483 views, posted 4:26 am 25/09/2018 in Funny Stuff by LordViscera
LordViscera has 18573 posts, 2658 threads, 821 points, location: 1123 6536 5321
Jarl of Glencoe

Extra Points Given by:

Quaektem (10), MASTERV (10), marksyzm (5), tamsnod27 (5), Flee (5)

Comments

0
4:43 pm 25/09/2018

LordViscera

Quote by elsels:
Maybe not. Her lawyer now has issues with the whole hearing and thinks it will be "unfair" to her client to have to testify and give details. She is also demanding that the judge testify first, and that is NOT how these things go. He is the accused, he gets to testify after the accuser. It is quite simple. I don't think they thought that this would go far and that he would withdraw when the allegations surfaced. He for his part has hired a very good libel and slander attorney.


what a coincidence. She has a problem being cross-examined , but has no issue making this guy be cross-examined without a charge actually being brought! As Ben Shapiro asked quite adroitly, How often do accusers get to have defendants testify first, answering an accusation that, officially hasn't been made as of yet? There can be bo discovery as there are no details, no witnesses to cross-examine for the defense, no evidence to refute. What a cluster fuck and the people who sympathize are complicit in this charade

0
4:46 pm 25/09/2018

dr3n

that is literally how law works though isnt it?

1
5:16 pm 25/09/2018

LordViscera

no that isn't how the law works. You go to an investigative agency (police/DA/attorney general et al) and you make your claim that something is wrong. They begin a cursory investigation, collecting evidence. They do it, not the media, not the accuser running around making press releases, not publicly slandering the individual. If there is enough evidence to justify moving forward, the da/ag brings charges (sometimes with the help of a grand jury) and then the indictment is read, in court with the accuser being identified and the ACTUAL charges and details being laid out for the judge. If it proceeds, then discovery and interviews of the accuser and the defendant then happen by the appropriate lawyers.

1
5:18 pm 25/09/2018

LordViscera

and the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, not the defendant. That's why the 5th amendment is used so often, to stop from self-incrimination. Because if the da can't make the case.....beyond a preponderance of the evidence they fail with the conviction.

0
5:20 pm 25/09/2018

LordViscera

where has this woman done any of what I have just described? She wrote a letter to a rep, has no details, and the event can't be corroborated. My god I took cursory law classes and this shit is so inept it's disgusting that even I can smell it from here!

0
6:04 pm 25/09/2018

dr3n

Quote by LordViscera:
Quote by dr3n:
i think the most shocking thing about all of this is the reaction to a woman who claims that she was assaulted before anyone has had chance to look at it...

the vitriol aimed is sickening.. its no wonder that women are hesitant to come forward in cases like this..

oh for fuck sake, please tell me you have more about you than this tripe about the accusation is enough? She had 38f*ing years to do something about it. But I tell you waht, I'll just keep this supposed tragedy in my pocket until it's politically convenient to bring it up and then I want sympathy and to be believed. Nevermind that this guys life will be ruined either way, as Clarence Thomas has been even though it wasn't proven, Anita f*ing Hill is still a paragon of virtue and had movies made of her but this guy has no charges substantiated against him but that's fine. All for the altar of progressivism



...yet

1
7:08 pm 25/09/2018

elsels

Quote by dr3n:
that is literally how law works though isnt it?



No! That is quite the opposite of how our laws work.

1
7:20 pm 25/09/2018

dr3n

I think what happened was my phone didn't refresh the page and I was replying to something else.. The point I was trying to make was that in law somebody will accuse someone else of doing something and if the authority's see probable cause or damage then it moves on from there..

That is exactly what is happening here..

Neither you, me,lv or anyone else can claim with any truth or knowledge if this woman is lying or telling the truth..

Yet...

I do hope in a way that you are correct, and that she is found to be lying through her back teeth..

Because if you are wrong and he is found guilty....

0
7:40 pm 25/09/2018

elsels

Right on the first part

The problem stems from the second part that you are ignoring.

She has NOT gone to law enforcement to denounce BK of doing anything to her, that is actually the very first step. She has not taken the very first step of any investigation.

First of all this would be a juvenile issue (meaning investigated by juvenile law), second it would be in local city in Maryland. The next thing would be for her to provide some evidence of what she is alleging, then the police would see if there is anything there to investigate. At this point NO ONE knows what the actual allegations are. She said in her letter Sex Assault, but that can be from an unwanted kiss, to grabbing her behind, or exposing himself to her, rubbing his clothed body against her, anything can be now considered sex assault. Of course early 1980s laws would apply to this.

The police would investigate this if they had a criminal report and still it would be treated in the juvenile justice system because by her own statement they were children when it happened (teens are kids in the US for the matter of law- except in some cases of rape and murder). Then after the investigation is completed, IF, IF any evidence was there they would forward this to a prosecutor who would then decide if the matter was worth taking further as in charges to the juvenile- all of this would happen in secrecy and those records would be sealed forever unless- unless the accused repeated the same alleged crime and enough evidence was brought forth to open those juvenile records which is very, very difficult.

1
7:43 pm 25/09/2018

dr3n

so yeah.. back to what i said 3009348921 posts ago.. lets wait and see what happens before declaring with all certainty that she's lying through her back teeth...

1
7:45 pm 25/09/2018

elsels

Testifying to Congress is not denouncing a crime. If she believes he is a criminal she needs to go Montgomery County PD for them to investigate. You cannot ask the FBI to investigate an alleged groping that happened between teen kids almost 40 years ago.

PS I for my part didn't say she was lying, I am just wondering motive here. It is possible something happened to her, very possible, but she can't remember anything about it. She only just recently named BK in July. Not even in 2012 during the alleged therapy sessions did she name BK.

1
1:59 pm 26/09/2018

REALITY

they never wanted her to turn up, just to make it through until next week.

2
8:36 pm 26/09/2018

LordViscera

Quote by dr3n:
I think what happened was my phone didn't refresh the page and I was replying to something else.. The point I was trying to make was that in law somebody will accuse someone else of doing something and if the authority's see probable cause or damage then it moves on from there..

That is exactly what is happening here..


that isn't what is happening, and the pollys are even admitting that. They are saying this isn't a court of law so they don't have to have the presumption of innocence first. and this is the basis of our justice system. So once again, the Senate doesn't believe they are accountable to the laws of the land. They are shit

0
11:12 am 27/09/2018

dr3n

this is the first step though isnt it? its not going to end at the end of today where everyone shakes hands and walks off into the sunset regardless of what happens.. *if* this is nothing more than a politically motivated attack - as some people claim it is - then think about what that actually entails for a second.. that means that *this* is just the first round doesn't it..? it is just the start of building up momentum for the bigger trajectory and true end goal.. because clearly somebody somewhere thinks that they have enough "dirt" on him and that with that "dirt" they are planing to cause as much damage as possible aren't they?

*if* it is all lies and politically motivated that is..

and if that is the case and the left/dems/anti trumpers/whoever are behind this then that must mean they have a strategy in place with an end goal.. there will need to be teams of people gathering information, pushing the people in the whitehouse, fueling the media, creating the social media posts, rallying the troops, organising the "attack", etc, etc.. but remember that all of this is going to cost a lot of time and effort, and will require skilled, experienced people that have done this before and who do not come cheap. you would need this as a minimum..

so going down that line we can probably/safely say that none of that would take place unless they genuinely believed or knew that they had something that would come to fruition. if it is just a politically motivated attack that is.. if they didnt think that this would work then to be blunt *they* just wouldn't bother.. they would put their efforts into something else instead which would.. as you know - its all about getting the result.. and certainly not about investing time and money and people in red herrings..

So i dont know what's worse at the end of the day.. the thought that this is a politically motivated attack which will be backed by god knows how many people who think that the end result is achievable or that she is actually telling the truth and Mr K did molest these women..

another one has come out today havent they? what's he up to now then? four is it?? this is exactly what i mean.. i dont think its coincidence that these women are being trotted out one by one.. its like the slow build up to the crescendo.. even trump is now acknowledging it.. and with his track record of supporting the likes of Moore, Ailes, O'reilly, etc then it must be bad.. :/

0
5:28 pm 27/09/2018

LordViscera

If he did it, he should be prosecuted, not just denied a seat on the court. But the allegations aren't even a crime. That's where this becomes ridiculous. The latest accuser supposedly saw gang rapes over and over and was a victim of one. If you saw at 9 parties that boys (teenage boys btw when you were a college-aged woman) engaging in gang rape trains, why would you go back to another party? Why wouldn't you, as an adult, call the police??? Rescue the young girls this was being perpetrated on? If you were the target of a rape, would you go back to a similar situation???? This whole thing is beyond ridiculous, and they think that posturing and lying will suffice. The real legacy of politics in the US, they all have lost touch with reality and think any fabrication if said often enough will pass as the truth.

Add Comment

via teoti, or register to add a comment!