09-18-2018, 10:31 PM
(09-18-2018, 06:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: She doesn't know where the party was
She doesn't know how she got there
She doesn't know how she got home
She was drinking
Her political views are completely contrary to the way Kavs has adjudicated in the past
She never mentions a name in the Dr's notes, but husband clearly remembers her saying a name
Just to name a few
Note to self: Never hire Fred if I'm in a bind.
All of these things are exactly what Fred would bring up in court. You missed the biggest one though, that the memories were thirty years old before she revealed them to anyone. While this doesn't disqualify her recollection any person involved in this profession would eat that single fact raw. Witness and victim testimony is often inconsistent and very often changes over time. If Fred was being honest he'd admit that a common defense attorney tactic is to delay trial so witness and victim recollections of the attack can degrade over time. Definitive the night of becomes I'm not sure ten months later, much less thirty years. Again none of these factors means she's not telling the truth, but every one of them makes the possibility that her story isn't wholly based in fact a more likely possibility.
I was hoping Fred would be honest for a change when I asked him that question. He clearly dodged is as he doesn't want to be associated with the inevitable GOP response to this allegation, nor does he want to be portrayed as unsympathetic to a alleged victim of sexual assault. We get it, Fed, but going after the very factors that bfine and I brought up would be your job and if you didn't do exactly that you'd be monstrously incompetent at best. Being a defense attorney is a difficult job, you have to defend some of the worst people on Earth to the best of your ability. It's a shame Fred couldn't share some actual insight with us in this case.
