Accuser’s name is Deborah Ramirez.
From the article:
Yes, you do this when it happened. She didn’t. There was never a complaint. 36 years later she still hasn’t made a complaint. She is liable for her accusations. What part of this don’t you understand?
There is also a third woman.
Do you have a link?
As has been repeatedly mentioned testimony is a form of evidence. So, yes, I at least expect a reporting party to speak with investigators. I held that expectation thousands of times when I dispatched police to incidents.
It is not the responsibility of that reporting party, whether victim or just a witness, to do the investigating. But generally most investigations need cooperation from someone willing to at least step forward and make a complaint. That means providing evidence, even if the only evidence is the recording of a 9-1-1 call reporting the matter.
On some occasions police come upon an incident themselves. In that case they are the reporting party and have a professional obligation in handling the matter. And sometimes a reporting party uses and anonymizing method to report a matter (calling a Crime Stoppers number that promises anonymity) but those are comparatively rare.
PredictIt is up to 67% that Kavanaugh won’t be confirmed by the end of October.
Michael Avennati saying he represents her.
A popular joke going around twitter – “15 more accusers, and the GOP will have to make Kavanaugh President!”.
Thanks. That doesn’t tell us much, though, but if it’s significant hopefully more will come out soon.
Very high chance, IMO, that Kavanaugh withdraws from consideration in the next few days.
So she was drunk and as of six days ago had no sufficient recollection of the event from the 1980s, yet after “assessing” her memories, she now can recall all of these details. Oh, and surprise, she wants an FBI investigation. I’ll bet she is a conservative Republican who would otherwise support Kavanaugh.
If the Republicans allow this shit to stick, they will never confirm another Supreme Court justice again! The playbook is out in the open and they should not let the left use it.
The top tweet from him is “My client is not Deborah Ramirez.”
Yes, when shadowy operators manufacture allegations, they make sure the accuser talks about how drunk they were and how their memory is not perfectly clear. :rolleyes:
Exactly
That’s the third woman, not Ramirez.
That’s certainly the expectation, but people are routinely prosecuted with or without victim cooperation. Simple example: domestic violence incidents.
More importantly: It is not the job of the victim to gather evidence. Period. (Though that is a common misconception among the ignorant.)
This isn’t even a response to my post, what I said is that many in this thread, and many in congress, have said that they don’t care, that even if the allegations are 100% true, they would still support the confirmation.
So, even if we dug up some old home video footage of him ambushing her in the hallway, shoving her into a room, turning on loud music, shoving her to the bed and ripping at her clothing, while stifling her screams, they would still support the confirmation. They don’t see sexual assault as that big a deal, they even come from the standpoint of “who hasn’t done that?”
Well, you know who hasn’t done that? Lots and lots of people. I can count on the toes of one hand how many times I have done that. If you think that such things are normal, and that it is just boys being boys, and that it was just a drunk teenager, then you are defending rape as a legitimate activity.
Though I believe her, I can see legitimate reasons to doubt her story, and I don’t know that we will ever know the entire truth of the matter. But there is no legitimacy to defending the alleged actions.
Most important question: Did Kavanaugh’s doppelganger attend Yale?
And of course there are more incidents. Rapists don’t quit after high school.
So, from Kavanaugh’s perspective, his chief task is to persuade a handful of fence-sitting Senators that there’s no risk that in voting to confirm, it might be later revealed that they voted for an attempted rapist who had not been sufficiently investigated.
What’s the best way to do that? ISTM that the best way would be to ask for objective third party investigators to look at absolutely everything again – to say “I have nothing to hide, please look into everything about me, including talking to Mark Judge and any others identified by the accuser(s)”. But ISTM that the method he’s chosen is “deny”, and that’s about it.
We’ll see what happens here, but that’s the task of Kavanaugh and his supporters – convince skeptical/cautious Senators that there’s no risk in voting to confirm him. It’s not a criminal proceeding, it’s a political proceeding. I think it’s reasonable to suspect that his choice of strategy to accomplish this might be at least somewhat related to his understanding of the facts of the accusations.
I found this bit rather enlightening:
So Ramirez has someone who backs up her story, and it’s a (gasp) man.
According to that latest article, Republican staffers have known about the second accuser for about a week, and their reaction was calling for an acceleration of the confirmation timetable.
Which says a lot about what Republican DC insiders think about how accusations of sexual assault and rape ought to be handled.