Kavanaugh SCOTUS hearings

[Dill]

(10-05-2018, 09:08 AM)michaelsean Wrote: I don't think it's the presumption of innocence as much as it is zero corroborating evidence.  I'm surely not going to state this didn't happen, but there is zero evidence it did.  Add in the lack of detail so that someone can defend themselves, and it's tough.

I wouldn't say there was ZERO evidence.  Ford's testimony is evidence. The question is only how much weight it can be given and to what degree it can be corroborated.  That is why questions can be legitimately asked about Ford's background, when she made the allegations, to whom, whether there are inconsistencies in her account over time, etc.

And it is not true that Kavanaugh cannot defend himself.  He can deny the allegation outright, point to his record, call on character witnesses, and the like.  "Lack of detail," to the degree there is such, is to Kavanaugh's advantage.