Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Time To Smear Kavanaugh's Good Name...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    I've come to believe that she isn't lying and honestly believes what she is saying. I also think that she is suffering from a false memory as can be seen by having given contradictory accounts on nearly every part of the alleged incident. When she first sought treatment in 2012 and her psychiatrist attempted to extract "repressed memories" (which commonly results in constructing false memories and why that technique is for the most part held in disrepute) her account was very different (it was four attackers and she never mentioned Kavanaugh) then the story began to evolve and go through different versions (it became a single attacker and finally two for instance), again typical of a false memory. The fact that she can't remember any of the pertinent details such as
    • when it happened -- she thinks it was at some point during the summer of 1982, but apparently was originally not quite sure of even the year.
    • where it happened -- she thinks it might have happened somewhere in Montgomery County
    • how she got there -- or even if she went with someone.
    • if her alleged attackers followed her upstairs or were already upstairs and ambushed her.
    • how many people were involved in the alleged attack -- as noted it has changed from four to one to two.
    • how she got home -- again if she was with anyone.


    Are also red flags for a false memory
    I'm not sure all of those are red flags. Vis-a-vis the number. Usually - at least from the contact I had with litterature - what's looked for with false memories is social contagion. If someone planted the idea in their head. Whether they're reporting memories they couldn't have formed - say from the age below three. How the memory is remembered are the red flags, it seems to me. Missing details are just witness testimonies being human. Though if you have a link to clinical studies on this I'd love to read it.

    Then there is the fact that she never told anyone about being attacked -- not the authorities, not a school counselor or teacher she liked and trusted, not any classmates, not a bff, not a sibling or other close relative -- until after she "discovered" she had been attacked decades later[1].
    Its been estimated that less than a seventh of all attempted rapes go unreported. So this doesn't seem out of place.

    And of course those that, as time goes on, she "remembers" being there, including a close friend, are saying that it didn't happen.
    This would definitely make it more unlikely. Of all discrepancies, other witness testimonies fundementally disagreeing is rather important. I won't deny that.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
      Nope, not good enough. Just because an accusation might be personally costly to the one making it doesn't automatically grant their accusation credibility.
      You're the one making the rather strong claim that she's outright lying. You're the one with a huge evidence burden here.

      Unless you can show a motivation, it seems its likely she's being honest. You're also ignoring there being two layers to her credibility, whether she's being honest, and how realiable her memory is.

      Bull crap...
      I keep forgetting. Is this term kosher on tweb? Or is that on the naughty words list?

      justice is not determined by mathematical probability, it is determined on a case by case basis by looking at the evidence for each specific case, and in this case,
      You asked me to show my reasoning for claiming it was more likely than not. I did. You didn't like it. And now you're moving the goal post into a courtroom session.

      Court systems in the US are strange beasts to me, juries that aren't trained to be that as well. How they have to deal with things there, is a different beast entirely than actually working out what happened or not. The two are related but not identical. Juries are quite capable of being befuddled. Take for instance O.J Simpson where any inferential reasoning makes it pretty clear that he very likely did it, but the jury was swayed by a brilliant lawyer.

      sketchy memory
      All witnesses have sketchy memory. And reporting details are no garranty that the details are correct either. Humans have incredibly fallible memory. If you were run over by a guy in a green car, you're as likely to report as blue as green in the courtroom.

      the inconsistency in her narrative over time
      All witness narratives are inconsistent unless they're pretty much reading from a script, and not doing active work in corroborating.

      the lack of any corroborating details
      This is not a reason to think she's lying. You're simply saying things I've already said Mountain Man.

      and that each person she has so far named has emphatically denied her accusations.
      This is the only plausble thing that could cause me to think that she's lying, though its far more plausible that as Rogue06 points out, that she's suffering either from a false memory or mistaken identity.

      And, no, your fallible memory hypothesis doesn't account for any of this. If it was a case of Ford saying that two guys attacked her, and her friend saying that only one guy attacked, and another person saying that he remembers seeing Ford and Kavanaugh together at the party but doesn't recall them ever going upstairs then you could very reasonably make the case that each person is remembering a slight variation of the same incident.
      True, but as I admitted in the other post, I didn't take into account there being other witnesses. It does change the calculations somewhat, and I don't have enough time tonight to work out by how much.

      But that's not what we have here. We have a single claimant making a specious accusation that is disputed by four people that she herself has named. That being the case, what's the probability that Ford is falsely accusing Kavanaugh? I think "pretty darn high" is the correct answer.
      Ah so you've moved it to a 'false accusation' and not lying. Well I'll take that as an improvement then Mountain Man. Because in all the posts from you on this thread you haven't produced a single good argument in support of her lying about it. That seems to more implausible than all the alternative explanations, including the entire thing never happening and being a completely false memory.

      I consider a false identity more likely than the false memory.

      Without the witnesses I'd have ranked the likelihood of Kavanaugh having attempted to rape her, given her testimony to be 80%, but with the witnesses I'll have to factor that into the inference. That'll definitely lower the probability but I can't tell by how much yet.
      Last edited by Leonhard; 09-23-2018, 02:10 PM.

      Comment


      • Ugh, wrote 'killed' instead of 'run over' in the last post. I'm heading to bed. Goodnight guys.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
          WHAT facts? Everything has been denied by people that Ford herself has named, including her lifelong friend who presumably has no reason to lie and has no memory of the party or of ever seeing Ford and Kavanaugh together. Are you suggesting that EVERYBODY at this supposed party was too drunk to remember anything? Not likely.
          It would be good if you could stick to the context of my original statement when composing a rebuttal. Originally I am dealing with the accusation that her inability to remember details means she's lying. That simply isn't true. The content of her story is consistent with how memory works in a situation like this and her decision not to report it is consistent with how many women react in that situation.

          And sorry, but I don't buy the "Sexual assault causes women to forget key details or have vivid memories of things that didn't happen" canard. That's all based on the "repressed memory" BS that has been debunked by numerous researchers.

          https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...dhood-memories
          https://harvardmagazine.com/2008/01/...ed-memory.html
          I'll take the word over those that work with these cases day in and day out over your own. And so far, the claim is not 'repressed' memory, but rather that certain details surrounding the event can't be remembered, whereas the specific details of the assault are remembered with absolute clarity. I can take a look at my own memories of certain traumatic events and can tell that while I couldn't tell you when many of them happened, I know exactly what happened. So it doesn't seem at all far-fetched to me.

          There is nothing about the facts as we know them so far that would suggest that Ford is telling the truth or that Kavanaugh is guilty.
          That simply is not true. Kavanaugh clearly was deeply involved in a culture during high school and college that maintained a pride in itself in terms of a massively excessive party culture and a deeply misogynistic attitude towards women, as detailed by the book written by the very close friend of Kavanaugh placed in the room with him by Ford, and as widely known in terms of the reputation of the fraternity he was a member of. Ford sought help in dealing with the effects of the event before Kavanaugh was nominated, long before Trump's presidency could be even imagined, and during a time when it seemed likely Obama's successor would be a Democrat. Indeed, up until election night 2016, it seemed likely Obama's successor would be a Democrat.

          So it is, in fact, very possible she's telling the truth. It's also possible she's confused about the participants, just as it's possible Kavanaugh was so plastered he has no knowledge of his own actions.

          If it happened, it is likely Judge would cover for his buddy, it is likely Kavanaugh would deny it.

          So who knows what the truth is. We'll never know for sure. We might get a better window into it if someone at the party can say they remember something consistent with the story Ford tells and give details consistent with or contrary to what she tells.

          But here is one thing that to me says it might well be true. She names names. We know who some of the other people are that she thinks were there. That would be a very stupid thing to do if she was making it up. So I'm fairly sure she believes this is what happened to her. And the fact none of those people, even friends of hers, can validate her story must be devastating. Likewise, if Kavanaugh has no memory of ever doing anything like that, it must be very disturbing for him as well.

          I doubt very seriously this is the sort of "she's a demon and he's a saint' situation that you would like to paint MM. It's very likely somewhere in between.


          Jim
          Last edited by oxmixmudd; 09-23-2018, 02:21 PM.
          My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

          If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

          This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
            Ah so you've moved it to a 'false accusation' and not lying.
            I don't think there is a meaningful difference between a false accusation and a lie. If Ford had any reason to suspect Kavanaugh before (and I'm not convinced that she did), the number of named witnesses who have denied her claims certainly should be causing her to second guess her own recollection. I suspect this is the reason she is desperately trying to avoid testifying under oath.
            Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
            But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
            Than a fool in the eyes of God


            From "Fools Gold" by Petra

            Comment


            • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
              But here is one thing that to me says it might well be true. She names names. We know who some of the other people are that she thinks were there. That would be a very stupid thing to do if she was making it up.
              Too bad those named witnesses have all emphatically denied her claims, including her lifelong friend who presumably has no reason to lie! If Ford isn't outright lying then I suppose she could have some serious mental issues that cause her to vividly remember things that never happened. The fact that she and her lawyer are using every trick in the book to avoid testifying under oath is certainly suspicious.
              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
              Than a fool in the eyes of God


              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

              Comment


              • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                It sounds like it did trigger something. She sought help in 2012. But it wasn't worth the public attention until the stakes were high enough, in this case a SC nomination.

                Jim
                Which took ...six years to surface?
                Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                sigpic
                I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                Comment


                • To put things into perspective, Ford has said there were four people besides herself at the party: Bret Kavanaugh; Kavanaugh's friend Mark Judge; Patrick J. Smyth; and Ford's lifelong friend Leland Ingham Keyser.


                  Source: Three Witnesses Described by Kavanaugh Accuser Do Not Support Her Claims….

                  Four of the people Ms. Ford claimed were present, including the accused Judge Brett Kavanaugh, now publicly state they have no knowledge of anything related to the accusation; including no recollection of any attendance at any gathering at a high school party claimed by Ms. Ford.

                  The only person left claiming attendance to a party; at the unknown time; in the unknown year; at the unknown residence; is the accuser, Mrs. Blasey Ford.

                  Who’s House? According to her story, there are five teenagers at “the house”. So it has to be one of “their houses”. Yet four of the five have said they don’t have any idea what she’s talking about; it’s not their house… and it’s not Mrs. Ford’s house; so…


                  https://theconservativetreehouse.com...rt-her-claims/

                  © Copyright Original Source

                  Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                  But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                  Than a fool in the eyes of God


                  From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                  Comment


                  • Another Woman?

                    https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-...eborah-ramirez
                    Last edited by seer; 09-23-2018, 07:46 PM.
                    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by seer View Post
                      Here's an interesting part...

                      “This is another serious, credible, and disturbing allegation against Brett Kavanaugh.


                      If it's "as credible" as the first one, we're still in for a rough ride.

                      Then....

                      She was at first hesitant to speak publicly, partly because her memories contained gaps because she had been drinking at the time of the alleged incident. In her initial conversations with The New Yorker, she was reluctant to characterize Kavanaugh’s role in the alleged incident with certainty. After six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney, Ramirez said that she felt confident enough of her recollections...


                      After 6 days of "assessing her memories"?
                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by seer View Post
                        This is buried a dozen paragraphs below the headline:

                        One of the male classmates who Ramirez said egged on Kavanaugh denied any memory of the party. “I don’t think Brett would flash himself to Debbie, or anyone, for that matter,” he said. Asked why he thought Ramirez was making the allegation, he responded, “I have no idea.” The other male classmate who Ramirez said was involved in the incident commented, “I have zero recollection.”

                        In a statement, two of those male classmates who Ramirez alleged were involved in the incident, the wife of a third male student she said was involved, and three other classmates, Dino Ewing, Louisa Garry, and Dan Murphy, disputed Ramirez’s account of events: “We were the people closest to Brett Kavanaugh during his first year at Yale. He was a roommate to some of us, and we spent a great deal of time with him, including in the dorm where this incident allegedly took place. Some of us were also friends with Debbie Ramirez during and after her time at Yale. We can say with confidence that if the incident Debbie alleges ever occurred, we would have seen or heard about it—and we did not. The behavior she describes would be completely out of character for Brett. In addition, some of us knew Debbie long after Yale, and she never described this incident until Brett’s Supreme Court nomination was pending. Editors from the New Yorker contacted some of us because we are the people who would know the truth, and we told them that we never saw or heard about this.”

                        The former friend who was married to the male classmate alleged to be involved, and who signed the statement, said of Ramirez, “This is a woman I was best friends with. We shared intimate details of our lives. And I was never told this story by her, or by anyone else. It never came up. I didn’t see it; I never heard of it happening.” She said she hadn’t spoken with Ramirez for about ten years, but that the two women had been close all through college, and Kavanaugh had remained part of what she called their “larger social circle.” In an initial conversation with The New Yorker, she suggested that Ramirez may have been politically motivated. Later, she said that she did not know if this was the case.

                        So the pattern continues: a woman has vivid memories of being sexually assaulted by Kavanaugh, yet the people named as witnesses have no memory of it.
                        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                        Than a fool in the eyes of God


                        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                          So the pattern continues: a woman has vivid memories of being sexually assaulted by Kavanaugh, yet the people named as witnesses have no memory of it.
                          So, once again, we have a psych student consulting with lawyers - this time for 6 days - "assessing her memories". Sounds like another "repressed memory" debacle.
                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                            So, once again, we have a psych student consulting with lawyers - this time for 6 days - "assessing her memories". Sounds like another "repressed memory" debacle.
                            Oh, but prepare for the chorus of self-righteous liberals all clucking their tongues and saying, "How dare you disbelieve the victim and her sketchy, uncorroborated story! The lack of verifiable details and contradictory statements from named witnesses is what makes it believable!"
                            Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                            But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                            Than a fool in the eyes of God


                            From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                              Oh, but prepare for the chorus of self-righteous liberals all clucking their tongues and saying, "How dare you disbelieve the victim and her sketchy, uncorroborated story! The lack of verifiable details and contradictory statements from named witnesses is what makes it believable!"
                              Not at all. We "self-righteous liberals" have become quite accustomed to hypocritical Evangelicals supporting and defending sexual aggression against women by self-entitled, sexist men.
                              “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                                So the pattern continues: a woman has vivid memories of being sexually assaulted by Kavanaugh, yet the people named as witnesses have no memory of it.
                                Actually there were plenty of other witnesses, other than his close friends, who agree that he was very much a frat boy. He liked getting drunk, and was quite a different person while he was like that. Which does fit the narratives, since basically, that's what this is about. These upper class white boys, going to stag fests, getting drunk and then may or may not have done embarrasing things they shouldn't have.

                                This testimony flies in the face of the testimony by his friends. Though, unlike the close friend of Christine, who's testimony against her I think is plausible, we can't say the same for the friends of Kavanaugh who likely either don't remember, or are protecting their friend.

                                It is eyewitnesses to the claimed act itself we don't have. And considering how conservatives are currently treating these two witnesses, I don't fault them for not risking life, home and income by coming forward. Again the lack of eyewitnesses means there's not much here to investigate. So its the people around this person pushing for investigation that I think are the ones currently misacting.
                                Last edited by Leonhard; 09-24-2018, 12:47 AM.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                157 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                400 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                373 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X