That’s true, but there is a fair amount of research to show that repeat offenders are common among men who commit sex crimes. I’m hard press to think of any high profile #metoo guy who’s lost their position because of single instance, now maybe there should be. But as I’ve said since we are dealing with a court of public opinion, I’m quite comfortable convicting any man who’s had 3 women come forward an accuse him of sex crime, even if the only evidence is he said vs she said. In this case she could be lying, or she could just have a case of mistaken identity, or Kavanaugh and Mike Judge both could be lying. I don’t like the probability in this case.
Men in prison are often “generalists,” he said: “They would steal your television, your watch, your car. And sometimes they steal sex.”
But men who commit sexual assault, and are not imprisoned because they got away with it, are often “specialists.” There is a strong chance that this is their primary criminal transgression.
The rest of the article goes on to suggest that at some point sexual assault become pattern for many men who commit sex crimes.
It’s more likely that neither remember; Judge wrote a book after all called “Wasted.”
It’s a credibility issue, and has been shown in this and the SCOTUS thread, the rich (white) boy club finds Kavanaugh eminently credible. The rest of us, not so much.
We have different positions or ideas, arguing for the same result but those two positions don’t really match.
So he’s an okay candidate if this did happen because it was years ago, and people change, and well who is a teen boy to do if he can’t get away with stuff. He’s not going to do it again and apparently never did it again.
Then we have well he probably didn’t do it because those kind of people a serial rapist, i still submit this is not true for a number of reasons, but since he’s not a serial rapist he didn’t do it.
Dr. Ford is lying and is an awful person, not likely. There is no benefit to her for throwing herself into the world to be a human target.
Dr. Ford can’t remember the name or the face of the man that held her down and tried to raped her.
Those top two, don’t work together.
And unlike Aziz or Takei, none of those acts were described with the aggression and all out assault this event describe.
I’m incomplete agreement that even those traumatic moments in life can seem so vivid in memory, and yet possibly be completely wrong as well. Watch enough forensic shows and you’ll spot that pattern, repeatedly. Someone violently raped or attacked will often have the details entirely wrong.
But, if she remembers it as Kavanaugh, is she not doing the right thing to let someone know? It’s the job of the committee to listen to both and determine if anything is valid or not. A lifetime appointment to the highest court in our nation demands that we give more than a passing glance to the story, even if false.
This situation is significantly difference, these are two who never dated, never went to classes together, probably never attended a football game or community service event together. The saw each other as teenage parties. I maybe below average at facial recognition, but I’m not so bad that can’t remember the face of a wife or children like some poor people. But there have been many times where I’ve gone up to somebody who I know I’ve meet before at party, and asked them about a trip, their work or kids only to find out that I’ve got them confused with some other person. I’m actually quite good a recalling details of conversation from year ago. Recalling a classmate is very different. In the situation I described we were all positive that big guy was someone we had played poker with before it pretty much had to be a bit of inside job.
It should be of interest to all of us to watch how our brains fill in the missing details. All those tiny little assumptions reveal quite a bit about us, but absolutely nothing about Kavanaugh or Ford ;)
Now Mark Judge has refused to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and the Republicans on the committee are unlikely to compel him to testify. Why might that be?
I’m assuming that unless any of us have been 15yo girls that have been possibly sexually assaulted at a party, we can’t really know what someone would remember in that situation. But I can’t imagine it’d be difficult to remember who the person is that clamped their hand over your mouth as you tried to escape a potential rape. She had to go to therapy for it, so it sounds like the memory still haunted her, even if she wanted to forget.
You understand you’re describing most of the 65 women who vouched for Kavanaugh, right? He didn’t go to school with them, he didn’t date them , he probably only saw them at teenage parties or other social occasions. Yet they can be sure that he’s a great guy, while Ford can’t be sure he’s the one who assaulted her?
Ford said she told no one of the incident in any detail until 2012, when she was in couples therapy with her husband. The therapist’s notes, portions of which were provided by Ford and reviewed by The Washington Post, do not mention Kavanaugh’s name but say she reported that she was attacked by students “from an elitist boys’ school” who went on to become “highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington.” The notes say four boys were involved, a discrepancy Ford says was an error on the therapist’s part. Ford said there were four boys at the party but only two in the room.
Now what are the odds that a trained therapist made a mistake like that in her notes? 4 men attacking her as opposed two. The critical detail is how many men attacked her not how many were at the party.
Because Ford said there were 4 girls at the party? You realize that you’re constructing a rationale to disbelieve everything she says? Is there a reason you feel the need to do that?
Never fear, all of you. The old white Republican Senators will get to the bottom of this on Monday, by viciously attacking every aspect of Ford’s womanhood, no doubt calling her Slutty McSluttykin, and generally showing that they’re truly the worst of humanity.
Where are you getting girls from???. The therapist notes said she was attacked by 4 boys not two. You realize you are ignoring any discrepancies because you want to keep guy of the supreme court?
If Judge does not want to testify, that suggests there is more to his story than “we were never at the same party with that girl.” And that is Kavanaugh’s current position.
As for the Senate, I don’t know how you can “investigate,” or even pretend to investigate this incident while ignoring the eyewitness a few feet away.
That’s not unlikely at all. The therapist wrote down an answer to a question that was different than the question Ford answered; misunderstandings like that happen all the time. You really seem to be grasping at straws.
It’s very hard to concoct a scenario where both are being honest. The best case for Kavanaugh’s scenario is that he is honestly mistaken about ever knowing or socializing with the girl, and she intentionally or unintentionally misidentified Kavanaugh. Or he could be lying about knowing the girl, and she still could’ve misidentified him. Or she could have correctly identified him, and he honestly doesn’t remember. Or he is lying about the whole thing. In 3 out of 4 of those scenarios, there is good reason to keep him off the court.
Of course, since Kavanaugh has lied extensively in all his confirmation hearings about more directly relevant matters, in response to direct questions from senators, I’m not disposed to think he is telling the truth now.
