Pitting UltraVires

[Lance_Turbo]

West Virginia’s dumbest lawyer is presenting his closing argument.

@UltraVires

1. Not only that, but she should have some serious corroboration from the person that gave her the ride home. She said that she does not remember, but from her testimony, she should remember. Why?

She testified that the house near the country club was not within walking distance of her home. She also testified that she hid in the bathroom until believing it was safe to leave and bolted/ran/got the hell out of the front door.

So there she is in 1982 (and no, she did not say that she used a cellphone) and needing a ride. She either:

a) Walked 7 miles in the dark.
b) Walked back into the house she just escaped from to use the phone to call a ride.
c) Walked to a neighbor’s house to use the phone to call a ride.

Any of these would implant an indelible memory in her mind, and the person on the receiving end of that call would have been sufficiently worried to make further inquiry.

Why would it implant an indelible memory? Because you said so. This is crazy. You don’t get to decide how other people should remember stuff.

@UltraVires

2. Further, was she barefoot? If not, then the entire assault happened with her shoes on. Not impossible, but something that to me seems out of place.

This is bizarre. Like seriously it seems out of place to him that someone didn’t take their shoes off before being assaulted. I don’t even know where to start.

@UltraVires

3. If she does not recall the house, why the upstairs bathroom? In my experience, an upstairs bathroom in a two story house is reserved for the homeowners. They also have a downstairs bathroom for guest use. The use of an upstairs bathroom seems unusual that she would not have familiarity with a house. Again, not a deal breaker, but it raised a question in my mind.

This part kind of gets to the root of his malfunction. He seems almost entirely incapable of putting himself in someone’s shoes if it involves something outside his experience. Using the bathroom on the second floor of a house is completely unremarkable. Especially at a party with drinking.

@UltraVires

3. What were Judge and Kavanaugh doing upstairs? Just hanging out and waiting for the next girl to use the restroom? There were only two girls there. It might be a while before someone comes up there. Nobody at the party said, “Where in the hell are Mark and Brett?” They both were sufficiently hidden and quiet that she did not know they were there? She said she didn’t see them. Wouldn’t she have taken an immediate left or be facing forward to see these guys? Why would she be facing the bedroom to be pushed in the back?

There was a bathroom there. He can’t imagine what someone might be in an area of the house where there is a bathroom. He is weirdly hung up on the idea that the second floor of a house is somehow off limits at a teen drinking party.

@UltraVires

She also equivocated on several things:

1. Her fear of flying.

2. The second front door: Was it claustrophobia or for hosting Google interns? The claustrophobia does not make sense. She had no trouble getting out of the house once she reached the single front door. If she asked for a fire escape in the bedroom, that would make more sense. She went from 1982-2007 with only a single front door and never expressed a need for a second one?

3. Not telling her parents: Was it trauma or because she did not want to tell them she was at a beer party?

She didn’t equivocate on any of those things. The weird idea that sprang up among Kavanaugh defenders in the last couple of days that fear of flying means incapable of flying is nuts. Pretty much every commercial flight with more than a dozen passengers on it includes at least one with a fear of flying.

A fire escape from a ground floor bedroom? What the fuck?

Finally, sometimes people have more than one reason for doing things. This is bonkers.