Rape Victim: Hilary put me through Hell

post reply Forum Index » Political Discussion

◄ 1 2 3 ... 8 9 10 11 12 ► Go

Go to page...

03/17/2016 20:47

Subject: Re:Rape Victim: Hilary put me through Hell

quote

Anonymous

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is why so many people take issue with this whole story.

She discredited a 12-year old rape victim when she was a defense attorney by putting a statement in the affidavit about the mental stability of the child.

Then, in Nov., 2015, as a candidate for president, she makes the following tweets:

"Every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported."

"To every survivor of sexual assault...You have the right to be heard. You have the right to be believed. We're with you." —Hillary

So, as an attorney, she lends doubt to the credibility of the child’s story in the affidavit "because it was her job."
Then, as a candidate, she says all rape victims should be believed "because it is her job."

Just a bit of conflict here........Which is it?

You discredit yourself. The statement in the affidavit had absolutely no impact on anyone. It didn't discredit the girl or anyone else. The case was resolved without the affidavit because the State lost key evidence.

It impacted the VICTIM. Read the article.

I've read the article. The victim was impacted by the incompetence of the prosecutors who threw away evidence. The victim didn't get upset with Clinton until recently when the tape was released.

Can you see why it was painful for the victim to hear Clinton's laughter on the tape? I feel for her. Once again, I understand that the affidavit was not used and that no laws were broken. It is still pretty awful.

I am the pp whose dad quit criminal law when he got a racist murderer a $1 fine. When he spoke about that case 50 years later, he looked like he would cry every time. I took that to heart and I am having some trouble excusing Hillary's behavior.

So your dad apparently is a man of inflexible principle who decided he should "quit criminal law," whatever that means, presumably because the prosecution failed to meet their burden of proving guilt beyond any reasonable doubt. Isn't that wonderful for innocent individuals charged with a crime they didn't commit who are assigned an overworked CJA lawyer looking simply to plea out the case and move on. I'm guessing he wasn't a law professor who had just started a legal aid clinic. By the way, no court is going to allow an attorney to withdraw simply because her client tutns out to be a detestable monster. Can you begin to imagine how quickly a clinic would be shuttered if it became known that the attorneys failed to conduct their own independent investigation and failed to bring evidence relating to the credibility of the victim to the attention of the Court. In the end, this predator did jail time, probably not enough but I'm guessing it was bad enough given how he would have been treated by fellow inmates given the nature of the crime, because the prosecution and/or police f'ed up. Maybe you should speak with your father about the nature of the ethical responsibilities an attorney takes in when representing a client. Defending someone in a criminal proceeding is an eye-opening experience, particularly if you believe him to be guilty, and it would be pretty shocking to see someone beat a lie detector if you thought they were a fairly reliable investigative tool back in the day. Someone like that would stay with me and continue to be the source of great unease and discomfort.

I am not really sure what your point is. Once again, I was not criticizing Clinton for defending a rapist. I was criticizing her decision to go after the character of the child victim. Do we really have to do that in cases of child rape? I know this was standard practice when the rape victim was an adult but this seems different to me.

I was also astonished when listening to the tape. I have spent a lot of time with lawyers in my lifetime. My entire family is a bunch of lawyers. I remember one Thanksgiving dinner when it was just nine male lawyers and myself (a young woman at the time) and yet I have never seen lawyers laugh about their victories when discussing sickening cases of child rape. I am not talking about nice, liberal lawyers either. I am talking about a bunch of serious, tough A-hole lawyers who were very proud to brag about themselves. And yet, if the subject turned to child rape or murder or any seriously violent crime against an innocent, no one was laughing. That is seriously nasty. If there are lawyers who think that is acceptable, please enlighten me on that too.

It's easy to understand how a young woman in an extremely uncomfortable work situation might laugh or otherwise express her discomfort inappropriately. But you, who want to convince us you're so empathic, don't seem to realize this.

I bet you post here about Bill Clinton's sex life, too.