Rape Victim: Hilary put me through Hell

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can a lawyer tell me if it is the norm, in cases of child rape, for an attorney to make claims about the character of a child possibly enticing an older man to rape her? The affidavit claims that this little girl is emotionally unstable and she seeks out older men and also makes false claims about them. The child is 12 years old. I know this happens with adult victims but is it necessary when the rape victim is a child?

The rules have changed greatly in regards to what's admissible in sexual assaults, and it doesn't matter the age of the victim. However, if there are multiple false claims about the same acts, that can be admissible in some circumstances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She did her job, and did it well. I'm no fan of Clinton, but I am a huge supporter of defense lawyers, who are supposed to make sure that prosecutors really do prove their cases beyond a reasonable doubt.

+1000. People on here seem to have a gross misunderstanding of what criminal defense attorneys do. Even if Clinton actually knew her client was guilty, she still had a duty to zealously represent him.

People understand that. They also understand that, if in Hillary's shoes, they would rather quit than destroy a 12 year old rape victim.

Clinton didn't destroy a 12 year old rape victim. She got the case plea bargained because the State threw away the evidence. Frankly, I hadn't looked into this before and was just accepting the repeated claims that Clinton did something atrocious. My view is that none of the Clintons take prisoners and this would just be one more example. But, now that I've looked into it a bit, I see that the anti-Clinton case is very misleading. Clinton absolutely did nothing wrong in this case.

So you are comfortable with victim blaming and shaming even when it is unnecessary to win the case? That surprises me.

Oh, fun, let's distort each other's words! So, you are in favor of summary execution without trial?

The victim was not blamed or shamed. Clinton consulted a child psychologist and reported the findings in a affidavit. However, it turned out that because the State lost the evidence, they didn't go to trial. So, the affidavit became unnecessary. Because there was not a trial, we have no idea whether Clinton would have chosen to submit the expert findings. Maybe, probably even, but we don't know for sure. You are basing your entire case on something Clinton might have been prepared to do, but didn't actually do.

I am not distorting your words.You said she did nothing wrong. I have not said that defending the rapist was wrong. I have said that her comments on the little girl were wrong. That is victim blaming and in this case it was entirely unnecessary. I come from a family of attorneys and I went to law school but did not become an attorney myself. You can get an "expert" to say anything you want. This is on Hillary and it speaks to her lack of feminist conscience. I am not saying no one should vote for her because of this. I am saying it adds to my already low opinion of her. And I will be voting for her. And yes, I read the articles and most of the affidavit.

Not surprising. Logic is definitely missing.

Funny. But no, I had better things to do with my life. Lawyers tend to be very unhappy people and I saw the light before I took it that far.

Yet you opine about what legally and ethically what a lawyer can and cannot do. As if you know. Alright now. Go forth into your brightly dimmed light

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She did her job, and did it well. I'm no fan of Clinton, but I am a huge supporter of defense lawyers, who are supposed to make sure that prosecutors really do prove their cases beyond a reasonable doubt.

+1000. People on here seem to have a gross misunderstanding of what criminal defense attorneys do. Even if Clinton actually knew her client was guilty, she still had a duty to zealously represent him.

People understand that. They also understand that, if in Hillary's shoes, they would rather quit than destroy a 12 year old rape victim.

Clinton didn't destroy a 12 year old rape victim. She got the case plea bargained because the State threw away the evidence. Frankly, I hadn't looked into this before and was just accepting the repeated claims that Clinton did something atrocious. My view is that none of the Clintons take prisoners and this would just be one more example. But, now that I've looked into it a bit, I see that the anti-Clinton case is very misleading. Clinton absolutely did nothing wrong in this case.

So you are comfortable with victim blaming and shaming even when it is unnecessary to win the case? That surprises me.

Oh, fun, let's distort each other's words! So, you are in favor of summary execution without trial?

The victim was not blamed or shamed. Clinton consulted a child psychologist and reported the findings in a affidavit. However, it turned out that because the State lost the evidence, they didn't go to trial. So, the affidavit became unnecessary. Because there was not a trial, we have no idea whether Clinton would have chosen to submit the expert findings. Maybe, probably even, but we don't know for sure. You are basing your entire case on something Clinton might have been prepared to do, but didn't actually do.

I am not distorting your words.You said she did nothing wrong. I have not said that defending the rapist was wrong. I have said that her comments on the little girl were wrong. That is victim blaming and in this case it was entirely unnecessary. I come from a family of attorneys and I went to law school but did not become an attorney myself. You can get an "expert" to say anything you want. This is on Hillary and it speaks to her lack of feminist conscience. I am not saying no one should vote for her because of this. I am saying it adds to my already low opinion of her. And I will be voting for her. And yes, I read the articles and most of the affidavit.

Not surprising. Logic is definitely missing.

Funny. But no, I had better things to do with my life. Lawyers tend to be very unhappy people and I saw the light before I took it that far.

Yet you opine about what legally and ethically what a lawyer can and cannot do. As if you know. Alright now. Go forth into your brightly dimmed light

You are just so charming and delightful! I did not, in fact, opine about what legally and ethically a lawyer can and cannot do. I expressed my astonishment at Clinton's apparent lack of remorse and, even worse, her apparent enjoyment of discussing the missing the blood on the underwear of the defendant as well as the ineffective lie detector test. I believe that, although I am not a lawyer, I do have the right to be disgusted by the behavior of one.

[Anonymous]

sanders wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you people fucking serious

I would do absolutely everything she did if asked to represent a criminal defendant

What the fuck is wrong with you guys, and there is really no excuse because like everyone on here is a fucking JD

Well, it's comforting to know that you and most others here, would be comfortable with HRC defending someone who just raped your own 12-yr old daughter. And during trial humiliated and discredited her.

May all your 12-yr old daughters enjoy the same fate.

This case did not go to trial and therefore Clinton didn't humiliate anyone during the nonexistent trial. Though, I will note that you seem perfectly happy to see your son who is accused of a crime receive a less than thorough legal defense.

tell that girl she wasn't on trial. I'm sure she'll be relieved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you people fucking serious

I would do absolutely everything she did if asked to represent a criminal defendant

What the fuck is wrong with you guys, and there is really no excuse because like everyone on here is a fucking JD

Well, it's comforting to know that you and most others here, would be comfortable with HRC defending someone who just raped your own 12-yr old daughter. And during trial humiliated and discredited her.

May all your 12-yr old daughters enjoy the same fate.

You are disgusting and unhinged.

Sorry, no. I don't defend child rapists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
You are just so charming and delightful! I did not, in fact, opine about what legally and ethically a lawyer can and cannot do. I expressed my astonishment at Clinton's apparent lack of remorse and, even worse, her apparent enjoyment of discussing the missing the blood on the underwear of the defendant as well as the ineffective lie detector test. I believe that, although I am not a lawyer, I do have the right to be disgusted by the behavior of one.

Oh, FFS. I just listened to the whole damn audio recording.

She calls it a "terrible" case. She describes the prosecutor's mishandling of the case as "sad." It's also completely clear to me that, when she's laughing about the polygraph, or sounding like she's trying not to laugh about the missing evidence, it's about the failings of the system -- the fact that polygraphs are so useless, and the crime lab was so incompetent. She's whistling past the graveyard. YMMV, of course, but it really didn't sound to me like she was being callous about the victim. At all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you people fucking serious

I would do absolutely everything she did if asked to represent a criminal defendant

What the fuck is wrong with you guys, and there is really no excuse because like everyone on here is a fucking JD

Well, it's comforting to know that you and most others here, would be comfortable with HRC defending someone who just raped your own 12-yr old daughter. And during trial humiliated and discredited her.

May all your 12-yr old daughters enjoy the same fate.

You are disgusting and unhinged.

Sorry, no. I don't defend child rapists.

You just wished it upon PPs. Reread your post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You are just so charming and delightful! I did not, in fact, opine about what legally and ethically a lawyer can and cannot do. I expressed my astonishment at Clinton's apparent lack of remorse and, even worse, her apparent enjoyment of discussing the missing the blood on the underwear of the defendant as well as the ineffective lie detector test. I believe that, although I am not a lawyer, I do have the right to be disgusted by the behavior of one.

Oh, FFS. I just listened to the whole damn audio recording.

She calls it a "terrible" case. She describes the prosecutor's mishandling of the case as "sad." It's also completely clear to me that, when she's laughing about the polygraph, or sounding like she's trying not to laugh about the missing evidence, it's about the failings of the system -- the fact that polygraphs are so useless, and the crime lab was so incompetent. She's whistling past the graveyard. YMMV, of course, but it really didn't sound to me like she was being callous about the victim. At all.

I did say it was subjective and probably depends on our preconceived ideas of what kind of person HRC is. My interpretation was that she was amused and somewhat gleeful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You are just so charming and delightful! I did not, in fact, opine about what legally and ethically a lawyer can and cannot do. I expressed my astonishment at Clinton's apparent lack of remorse and, even worse, her apparent enjoyment of discussing the missing the blood on the underwear of the defendant as well as the ineffective lie detector test. I believe that, although I am not a lawyer, I do have the right to be disgusted by the behavior of one.

Oh, FFS. I just listened to the whole damn audio recording.

She calls it a "terrible" case. She describes the prosecutor's mishandling of the case as "sad." It's also completely clear to me that, when she's laughing about the polygraph, or sounding like she's trying not to laugh about the missing evidence, it's about the failings of the system -- the fact that polygraphs are so useless, and the crime lab was so incompetent. She's whistling past the graveyard. YMMV, of course, but it really didn't sound to me like she was being callous about the victim. At all.

I did say it was subjective and probably depends on our preconceived ideas of what kind of person HRC is. My interpretation was that she was amused and somewhat gleeful.

Ok, well, if your preconceived idea is that she takes joy from freeing child rapists and destroys the character of 12-year-old rape victims just for kicks, well, then, I don't know what to tell you. You do you, I guess. She probably also eats babies, punches little old ladies and is personally responsible for every sad dog in that Sarah McLaughlin "arms of the angels" commercial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you people fucking serious

I would do absolutely everything she did if asked to represent a criminal defendant

What the fuck is wrong with you guys, and there is really no excuse because like everyone on here is a fucking JD

Well, it's comforting to know that you and most others here, would be comfortable with HRC defending someone who just raped your own 12-yr old daughter. And during trial humiliated and discredited her.

May all your 12-yr old daughters enjoy the same fate.

You are disgusting and unhinged.

Sorry, no. I don't defend child rapists.

Are you upset that she was doing her job? Listen, she was a lawyer, and was doing her job. In our country you are innocent until proven guilty and are entitled to good legal representation. That's how rule of law works.

I would be much more worried if she threw the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You are just so charming and delightful! I did not, in fact, opine about what legally and ethically a lawyer can and cannot do. I expressed my astonishment at Clinton's apparent lack of remorse and, even worse, her apparent enjoyment of discussing the missing the blood on the underwear of the defendant as well as the ineffective lie detector test. I believe that, although I am not a lawyer, I do have the right to be disgusted by the behavior of one.

Oh, FFS. I just listened to the whole damn audio recording.

She calls it a "terrible" case. She describes the prosecutor's mishandling of the case as "sad." It's also completely clear to me that, when she's laughing about the polygraph, or sounding like she's trying not to laugh about the missing evidence, it's about the failings of the system -- the fact that polygraphs are so useless, and the crime lab was so incompetent. She's whistling past the graveyard. YMMV, of course, but it really didn't sound to me like she was being callous about the victim. At all.

I did say it was subjective and probably depends on our preconceived ideas of what kind of person HRC is. My interpretation was that she was amused and somewhat gleeful.

Ok, well, if your preconceived idea is that she takes joy from freeing child rapists and destroys the character of 12-year-old rape victims just for kicks, well, then, I don't know what to tell you. You do you, I guess. She probably also eats babies, punches little old ladies and is personally responsible for every sad dog in that Sarah McLaughlin "arms of the angels" commercial.

Oh Lord. No... I think she doesn't give a crap about the kid though. I also think her bs about being a feminist and caring about women and children is laughable but she is better than the alternative and I will vote for in the general. And btw, you are funny and I think I know you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You are just so charming and delightful! I did not, in fact, opine about what legally and ethically a lawyer can and cannot do. I expressed my astonishment at Clinton's apparent lack of remorse and, even worse, her apparent enjoyment of discussing the missing the blood on the underwear of the defendant as well as the ineffective lie detector test. I believe that, although I am not a lawyer, I do have the right to be disgusted by the behavior of one.

Oh, FFS. I just listened to the whole damn audio recording.

She calls it a "terrible" case. She describes the prosecutor's mishandling of the case as "sad." It's also completely clear to me that, when she's laughing about the polygraph, or sounding like she's trying not to laugh about the missing evidence, it's about the failings of the system -- the fact that polygraphs are so useless, and the crime lab was so incompetent. She's whistling past the graveyard. YMMV, of course, but it really didn't sound to me like she was being callous about the victim. At all.

I did say it was subjective and probably depends on our preconceived ideas of what kind of person HRC is. My interpretation was that she was amused and somewhat gleeful.

Ok, well, if your preconceived idea is that she takes joy from freeing child rapists and destroys the character of 12-year-old rape victims just for kicks, well, then, I don't know what to tell you. You do you, I guess. She probably also eats babies, punches little old ladies and is personally responsible for every sad dog in that Sarah McLaughlin "arms of the angels" commercial.

Oh Lord. No... I think she doesn't give a crap about the kid though. I also think her bs about being a feminist and caring about women and children is laughable but she is better than the alternative and I will vote for in the general. And btw, you are funny and I think I know you.

Oh, crap, I think we reached a civil agreement to disagree! We can't have that. Should we start talking about Israel?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You are just so charming and delightful! I did not, in fact, opine about what legally and ethically a lawyer can and cannot do. I expressed my astonishment at Clinton's apparent lack of remorse and, even worse, her apparent enjoyment of discussing the missing the blood on the underwear of the defendant as well as the ineffective lie detector test. I believe that, although I am not a lawyer, I do have the right to be disgusted by the behavior of one.

Oh, FFS. I just listened to the whole damn audio recording.

She calls it a "terrible" case. She describes the prosecutor's mishandling of the case as "sad." It's also completely clear to me that, when she's laughing about the polygraph, or sounding like she's trying not to laugh about the missing evidence, it's about the failings of the system -- the fact that polygraphs are so useless, and the crime lab was so incompetent. She's whistling past the graveyard. YMMV, of course, but it really didn't sound to me like she was being callous about the victim. At all.

I did say it was subjective and probably depends on our preconceived ideas of what kind of person HRC is. My interpretation was that she was amused and somewhat gleeful.

Ok, well, if your preconceived idea is that she takes joy from freeing child rapists and destroys the character of 12-year-old rape victims just for kicks, well, then, I don't know what to tell you. You do you, I guess. She probably also eats babies, punches little old ladies and is personally responsible for every sad dog in that Sarah McLaughlin "arms of the angels" commercial.

Oh Lord. No... I think she doesn't give a crap about the kid though. I also think her bs about being a feminist and caring about women and children is laughable but she is better than the alternative and I will vote for in the general. And btw, you are funny and I think I know you.

Oh, crap, I think we reached a civil agreement to disagree! We can't have that. Should we start talking about Israel?

Haha! Well, since this is a dcum first, I think we have a better shot than most...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You are just so charming and delightful! I did not, in fact, opine about what legally and ethically a lawyer can and cannot do. I expressed my astonishment at Clinton's apparent lack of remorse and, even worse, her apparent enjoyment of discussing the missing the blood on the underwear of the defendant as well as the ineffective lie detector test. I believe that, although I am not a lawyer, I do have the right to be disgusted by the behavior of one.

Oh, FFS. I just listened to the whole damn audio recording.

She calls it a "terrible" case. She describes the prosecutor's mishandling of the case as "sad." It's also completely clear to me that, when she's laughing about the polygraph, or sounding like she's trying not to laugh about the missing evidence, it's about the failings of the system -- the fact that polygraphs are so useless, and the crime lab was so incompetent. She's whistling past the graveyard. YMMV, of course, but it really didn't sound to me like she was being callous about the victim. At all.

I did say it was subjective and probably depends on our preconceived ideas of what kind of person HRC is. My interpretation was that she was amused and somewhat gleeful.

Ok, well, if your preconceived idea is that she takes joy from freeing child rapists and destroys the character of 12-year-old rape victims just for kicks, well, then, I don't know what to tell you. You do you, I guess. She probably also eats babies, punches little old ladies and is personally responsible for every sad dog in that Sarah McLaughlin "arms of the angels" commercial.

I just laughed out loud at this response.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you people fucking serious

I would do absolutely everything she did if asked to represent a criminal defendant

What the fuck is wrong with you guys, and there is really no excuse because like everyone on here is a fucking JD

Well, it's comforting to know that you and most others here, would be comfortable with HRC defending someone who just raped your own 12-yr old daughter. And during trial humiliated and discredited her.

May all your 12-yr old daughters enjoy the same fate.

You are disgusting and unhinged.

Sorry, no. I don't defend child rapists.

You wished for 12 year olds to be raped. You are mentally ill.