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.
So what are you saying...do you think she's not real?
She seems to be real...genuine is another issue.
For a party girl (cheerleader, sorority member, drinker), she sure does seem to be horribly damaged from what, according to the information I've seen, was a consensual encounter that got broken up before it got started and, apparently, have never happened in the first place.
Ford's friend said she BELIEVED. Her. But did not remember going to the party...
Since the friend was not IN THE ROOM according to Dr. Ford she was not an eyewitness
Since Dr. Ford said she didn't tell anyone, it seems likely she didn't tell her friend
The fact that her friend does not remember the party specifically seems par for the course
Judge says he doesn't recall the specifics
He also wrote two books and numerous articles about his being blotto drunk much of the time in high school
Seems you are confused.
Ford's witness friend, Keyser, who Ford identified as being at the party;
"Simply put," Walsh said, "Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford."
The lawyer acknowledged to CNN that Keyser is a lifelong friend of Ford's."
The classmate (not friend), Miranda, that "believed" Ford was not identified as a witness.
So, we have the life long friend that does not recall the event ever happening, though identified as a witness, and we have not even a friend, but a classmate, who was not identified as a witness, and just states "she believes".
For a party girl (cheerleader, sorority member, drinker), she sure does seem to be horribly damaged from what, according to the information I've seen, was a consensual encounter that got broken up before it got started and, apparently, have never happened in the first place.
lolol, where, exactly, have you read that the encounter was “consensual”?
Nope. She named ONE witness who sent a letter advising he had no recollection.
The others she simply placed at the party - NOT in the room.
The witnesses state they do not even recall the party, thus the incident not happening. The incident could not have happened without the party, so far she cannot even prove the party happened.
It might be helpful for some of these people to ask themselves how they would feel if this happened to their father, uncle, brother, husband, nephew, or son. I think back on my high school days and my brothers. They went to parties with alcohol and it is numbing to think some woman who went to high school with one of them could destroy the life they have worked so hard to build without an ounce of proof, especially if their entire adult life is a walking contradiction to the behavior she is describing.
Good thing they didn't ruin their own life and sexually assault a classmate .
IGNORANT post as there was a law change in that state removing the statute of limitations. There is some question as to if this would be retroactive. In some states that did the same change it was retroactive.
That's not the question. The questions are when did the law change, and had the limitations period already expired? A change in the statute of limitations applies only to crimes for which the limitations period has not already expired.
The witnesses state they do not even recall the party, thus the incident not happening. The incident could not have happened without the party, so far she cannot even prove the party happened.
Get them under oath.
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.