Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's a funny question given all the accusations against Moore by anonymous people.
I also think that is highly improbable that a deputy district attorney was a big man around town. He probably wasn't paid very much.
Most if not all the accusers of Moore that I have read about have not been anonymous. I am convinced that he at the very least had and may still have a strong attraction to underage girls. There are just too many people coming forward saying the same thing. Police officers, former co workers etc. With that being the case it opens the door for these more serious allegations. I would not believe them if Moore did not have this checkered past. But he does.
I think the two serious claims against Moore are dubious. The yearbook appears to be a forgery with two different writing styles. It appears that accuser thought Moore added DA when he signed stuff, based on her divorce paperwork that had DA on it, but that was his assistant's initials. He also wasn't the district attorney at the time, and I don't think it is likely he would have included his occupation and location of the restaurant if he had signed it. The signature also has Christmas 1977 and then a specific date below in the different writing style. Why would Moore date it is twice.
Also, why would the girl have a yearbook at a restaurant in December? Yearbooks come out in the spring.
His attorney made a reasonable request that her attorney release the yearbook so that handwriting experts can examine it and the ink, but Gloria Allred has refused to do so. I think reasonable and fair person can dismiss that accusation as not credible given this.
The yearbook accuser said that Moore locked her in his car, but there weren't any child locks in cars in the late 70s. I've seen other people say that the BBQ restaurant didn't have a parking lot behind it but she said that he took her to a parking lot behind the restaurant.
I think you are dissecting details to suit those like yourself. I doubt if there was any forgery. In regards to the handwriting analysis, graphologists have a better understanding of what all is involved and Gloria has the ability to refuse, based upon knowledge of these matters. (The handwriting analysis defense is a weak excuse anyway, considering all other information regarding this guy being much more potent).
So she had her yearbook with her at the restaurant that day...she may have had it to share some photos, etc., with a coworker, your assumption being that one "would only have their yearbook out when first getting it."
As the woman explained about being locked in the car, consider that he reached behind her to lock the door, with her unable to access or in positon to do so, with him overtaking her.
It appears that her reference to a parking lot "behind the restaurant", was not meant as the restaurant parking lot, but another lot nearby.
I cannot believe to what extent one goes to defend a guy such as this, discrediting a woman's traumatic experience, especially with several, similar cases reported and others having known of his behavior.
I think you are dissecting details to suit those like yourself. I doubt if there was any forgery. In regards to the handwriting analysis, graphologists have a better understanding of what all is involved and Gloria has the ability to refuse, based upon knowledge of these matters. (The handwriting analysis defense is a weak excuse anyway, considering all other information regarding this guy being much more potent).
So she had her yearbook with her at the restaurant that day...she may have had it to share some photos, etc., with a coworker, your assumption being that one "would only have their yearbook out when first getting it."
As the woman explained about being locked in the car, consider that he reached behind her to lock the door, with her unable to access or in positon to do so, with him overtaking her.
It appears that her reference to a parking lot "behind the restaurant", was not meant as the restaurant parking lot, but another lot nearby.
I cannot believe to what extent one goes to defend a guy such as this, discrediting a woman's traumatic experience, especially with several, similar cases reported and others having known of his behavior.
I can easily suggest that you eager to find him guilty because you are a Democrat.
I find your last stattement to be interesting given the Democrat party did not believe Bill Clinton's accusers and in fact Hillary and other Democrats like James Carville attacked them viciously.
There are only two allegations against Moore regarding an underage woman, and the worst is the yearbook accuser.
I find your attempt to flippantly dismiss the questions about signature, which is clearly two different writing styles, to be curious. Why can't Gloria release the yearbook to a neutral custodian so experts can look at it? If it isn't a forgery, there shouldn't be a problem with doing this.
And as I've noted, Moore's Democratic opponent in Alabama is campaigning with Joe Biden, who is on video inappropriately touching numerous women and girls.
I can easily suggest that you eager to find him guilty because you are a Democrat.
I find your last stattement to be interesting given the Democrat party did not believe Bill Clinton's accusers and in fact Hillary and other Democrats like James Carville attacked them viciously.
There are only two allegations against Moore regarding an underage woman, and the worst is the yearbook accuser.
I find your attempt to flippantly dismiss the questions about signature, which is clearly two different writing styles, to be curious. Why can't Gloria release the yearbook to a neutral custodian so experts can look at it? If it isn't a forgery, there shouldn't be a problem with doing this.
And as I've noted, Moore's Democratic opponent in Alabama is campaigning with Joe Biden, who is on video inappropriately touching numerous women and girls.
1. As others have stated, feelings about this issue has nothing to do with political leanings.
2. So you say two of the accusers were underage. There again, you seem to make a judgement that anyone slightly older in the situation of his having attacked them, doesn't count. 🤔
3. The discussion is regarding Moore's case, nothing to do with the Clintons or Biden.
4. About the yearbook. G. A. knows if she can refuse allowing another's personal property to be given away or not, even for this purpose. Graphologists would know what is necessary or valid to examine, both aspects being something WE do not know about.
5. Lastly, I don't care to see men defending male attackers.
I'm not defending sexual assaults. It is dishonest for you to assert that.
I believe in innocent until proven guilty and allegations are not evidence. I find it hard to believe that if it is 'common knowledge' that Moore was a predator, that nobody made allegations for 40 years until a month out from a senate seat. He's been a controversial public figure for a long time.
You don't get to decide what people can talk about in relation to this topic. Joe Biden is campaigning with Doug Jones so your lack of interest in Joe Biden while at the same time calling Moore a pervert is interesting, and seems to indicate your comments could be related to your political leanings.
3 out of the 4 women in the Washington Post story, as I understand it, said they went out on dates with him and they were of legal age. If you are suggesting that Moore merely dating young women of legal age is a crime, you aren't being honest. I think the reason WaPo included those stories is they expected many social conservatives would not like to hear he was dating young women even if they were of legal age. They are trying to use legal behavior to buttress the allegations of illegal behavior and I think that is dishonest.
I think it is fair for me to point out Bill Clinton's popularity among Democrat voters if you are trying to suggest that I'm ok with sexual assault if I think Moore might be innocent. Hillary attacked his accusers in a way that I have not seen Moore do.
The yearbook thing has been a disaster for Gloria and her client whether you want to admit it or not. That woman should have also disclosed that the judge oversaw her divorce in 1999. There is no way that she forgot that.
Last edited by ClemVegas; 11-20-2017 at 12:37 AM..
Moore early on admitted to dating quite a few girls and specifically teens. That's ok. You may not like it but it's not assault and it's nothing anyone should be wagging their tongues about 40 years after the fact. Probably before many posters were even born. It just doesn't matter. Lot's of men like young girls. Lot's of young girls like older men. Lot's of men marry younger women, it's how you end up with a 60 year old man married to a 45 year old women. Get over it. And girls married much younger in the 50's and 60's than they do today, that's ok to. You don't understand it, but it's really fine. I bet your great grandma had kids at 16, call g'gpa out as a pervert why don't you.
The yearbook lady is an outlier, nothing she is claiming has been hinted at by anyone else and the "I'm the Assistant District Attorney and nobody will believe you" was the red flag. It's like "and then she paid for her lobster with food stamps and loaded it into her Escalade"...sometimes you just know BS when you see it. Usually someone is trying too hard to craft their story.
The 14 year old is the only thing iffy here but that was then and apparently she was the one setting the pace and it stopped when she said so. No harm no foul. This is really out of control at this point and anyone who can't see it is willfully blind and probably sitting on way worse offenses and covering up by projecting. Find something serious to be outraged over, we are't lacking. Start with how all newspapers and media are controlled by the same couple of corporations who push a specific agenda.
I'm not defending sexual assaults. It is dishonest for you to assert that.
I believe in innocent until proven guilty and allegations are not evidence. I find it hard to believe that if it is 'common knowledge' that Moore was a predator, that nobody made allegations for 40 years until a month out from a senate seat. He's been a controversial public figure for a long time.
.
This such a bizarre position to take. It was common knowledge LOCALLY in Arizona. Why on Earth would a guy in South Carolina know about a local politician's behavior 2,000 miles away when the victims have not come out publicly? We know about it now because, like the woman exposing liberals in Hollywood, the woman are stepping forward and speaking out.
If you think it is easy for a woman to come out and accuse a very powerful man, putting them through all of this scrutiny as they are called liars, you would be wrong. That is especially true when the victim is a teenager. It's a very brave thing to do and there's a reason woman have been reluctant in the past, just as the victims of child abuse are reluctant to tell their story.
Bill Clinton was impeached and villified in the media at the time. Everything about Hillary being furious with him and a breakup predicted was covered. Clinton has served his time. Roy Moore has gotten away with everything. Even Alabama’s ignorant governor has given him a pass.
How exactly has "Clinton served his time," by being married to Hillary?
The only penalty he paid was for lying and even that was minimal.
Several newspapers carrying editorials recommending a vote for Moore's opponent, some great points.
Quote:
A vote for Roy Moore sends the worst kind of message to Alabamians struggling with abuse: “if you ever do tell your story, Alabama won’t believe you.” Or, worse, we’ll believe you but we just won’t care.
To be clear: it’s not only his record on women and children that disqualifies Moore. If we vote for Roy Moore, Alabama will also show that we don’t care about you if you’re gay or Muslim or Catholic. If you’re an atheist or an immigrant. We’ll show each other that we only care about Roy Moore’s definition of Alabama. And that there’s not room for the rest of us.
This such a bizarre position to take. It was common knowledge LOCALLY in Arizona. Why on Earth would a guy in South Carolina know about a local politician's behavior 2,000 miles away when the victims have not come out publicly? We know about it now because, like the woman exposing liberals in Hollywood, the woman are stepping forward and speaking out.
If you think it is easy for a woman to come out and accuse a very powerful man, putting them through all of this scrutiny as they are called liars, you would be wrong. That is especially true when the victim is a teenager. It's a very brave thing to do and there's a reason woman have been reluctant in the past, just as the victims of child abuse are reluctant to tell their story.
This is not that hard to understand.
They interviewed Corfman over the weekend, very convincing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
