One and only Kavenaugh Hearings Thread (part 1)

I do know.
It isn’t even a question.

Nope.

Kavanaugh is a public figure. The burden of proof would be on him to show that it was a false statement.

This is nonsense. Truth is not the only defense against libel. It is an absolute defense against libel, but its not the “only” one. More importantly, Kavanaugh is a public figure - which means not only does he have to prove defamation, he has to prove malice as well.

You may not want to brush up on the law, but you should - if you don’t want to look foolish.

You’re mistaken. Not in a defamation case.

In this case Kavanaugh can easily prove reckless disregard for the truth and that she knew it wasn’t the truth.- malace

You know you can google this, right?

How will he “easily” prove that?

Three of them testify in court that they have no idea what she is talking about. Three that were supposedly there with her.

She has no one to confirm her story.

In order for him to prove malice, he has to prove that it was a false statement.

How do you expect him to do so?

Yet another person who doensn’t understand how criminal and civil law works

No one has testified under oath. And the people who were supposedly there, have EVERY motivation to lie.

Because of the nature of what she is claiming. She claims to have been a participant in the incident. Where it may be difficult to prove malice is if the person being sued is passing the story on second hand.

How do they prove it in court. All three testify under oath that they don’t recall any party like she describes they they all attended.

She has no one to back her story.

Do you see now how it’s proved she defamed him?

That made no sense.

Depends on who is believed.

Remember this would be a civil case. Standard is less than in a criminal case. Likely to have occured instead of without a doubt it occurred. And hard to not believe three over one. Especially when she can’t remember a lot of the particulars.

We’ll see.

You’re talking about yourself.

Remember.

No physical evidence. The only thing to go on would be their testimony. That’s it. Nothing further. If she should “suddenly remember” the other boy and girl there well after the testimony to a senate committee, the attorney for Kavanaugh would rip it to shreads.

Kavanaugh wants to be on the Supreme Court, not to get in an ugly civil case over something that happened (or didn’t happen) 36 years ago.