A lot of high school boys are going to start keeping calendars and video of their activities.
Cell phones track you anyway 
that won’t corroborate what you did at the time though would it? Just if you were at a certain area. That’s not good enough anymore.
That may be good for deciding whom you choose to believe, it is not good for taking action that destroys a persons life.
But…you might, if there were motivation to destroy you.
Depends on the tissue and conditions. Some can last for centuries or even thousands of years such as a hair with an attached follicle.
Dry semen or blood on fabric? Years or even decades depending on conditions.
DNA evidence has been used in recent years to both convict and exonerate people who have been behind bars for decades.
How exactly would that work? Do all these women know each other, have strategy sessions and come up with a plan? Or, random women from around the country just decide to jump on the bandwagon because…reasons? Here’s this great guy that all these women want to destroy because…reasons. Makes total sense, Doug.
The simple fact he’s been nominated is more than enough reason for millions to want him to be destroyed.
It doesn’t take a whole lot to get some people to act on their desires.
DNA says nothing about whether sexual contact was consensual or not.
I agree with you on that. People jump the gun and assume that the party is guilty and must be destroyed.
Presumption of innocence isn’t just a judicial standard. He stands to lose plenty if we allow him to be assumed to be guilty without evidence.
Only if the adults in this country allow this sort of nonsense.
The other thing I raised was that a person hell bent on lying about his really has nothing legally to be concerned about with a decades old allegation, wouldn’t you agree?
It does definitively place the person on the scene, which can be enough to convict. I’ve seen cases like that on the ID channel.
There seems to be with some a naive assumption that women wouldn’t ever lie about this. Centuries of the study of human nature has shown us that people, both men and women, are willing to lie about many things, and yes even under oath. This notion that just because someone is under oath that will compel someone not to lie is also naive. The fact is that there are no consequences of lying about a decades old allegation because it can’t be disproven.
What is really concerning is that this has the potential to set up a scary precedent for any woman who wants to bring down any man going into any type of high profile or even high paying type of position. Say you and a female coworker are both looking to be promoted to a better paying job at work. All she would have to do is either make an allegation herself or find someone else to do so.
1 Like
And yet it happens so rarely.
And a great many cases (maybe more) are not prosecuted despite DNA evidence.
DNA doesn’t differentiate between consensual sex and noncomsensual sex. It’s not enough.
I suppose you have to weigh several things.
First off, the woman in question must risk the penalty of perjury if found to be lying, which could result in a lengthy prison term. So, is this risk worth it if she has no proof? Why would she do that?
Remember this woman is a Doctor, she is not some random loser with nothing to lose.
Most, around 97% or so, sexual assaults go without reporting and prosecution. Mostly due to the stigma associated with it and the fears they would not be taken seriously. Such as what we are seeing here. So its completely plausible that she decided not to say anything because, as a 15 year old girl in the 1980s that is usually what happened.
Remember, his Mom was a Judge, he was wealthy and privileged, as was his classmates. His word against hers. Its not out of the question that a traumatized 15 year old girl might try to bury this in her subconscious and try to move on with her life.
So you have to look at the after effects. If this happened it would have an impact on her life, since that buried trauma bubbles to the surface over time. Did she have PTSD? Did it impair relations with her husband? Did she become a cautious person, always seeking a means of escape from any situation? Those patterns are telling and indicate prior trauma.
While this is not a criminal proceeding, the same investigative tools can be used here to give a reasonable assumption of plausibility to her claims or to doubt its veracity. Unfortunately, the Senate is forgoing these tools, such as an independent FBI investigation, because it probably doesn’t want to know what it will bring.
Remember, most of the Catholic molestation cases are decades old as well, and if the Catholic Church came out and said what some Cons are saying now, they would be booed out of the building. Sometimes it takes a long time to come forward. Sometimes one person speaking out enables others to feel their story might be heard and believed as well.
Right now its just a wait and see issue. Lets hear her out.
