Posted on 04/30/2023 5:34:41 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
This is what passes for an MSNBC legal "analyst." On Jonathan Capehart's Saturday morning show, MSNBC legal analyst Glenn Kirschner said that cross-examining people who claim to be sexual assault victims, such as Trump accuser E. Jean Caroll, is a "disservice."
Kirschner grudgingly acknowledged that the Sixth Amendment—that inconvenient thing!—gives defendants the right to confront and cross-examine their accusers. But Kirschner said that as a former prosecutor, it was "heartbreaking" for him to see sexual assault victims "falsely accused of making stories up."
Get the rest of the story and view the video here.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
What if Tara Reade, who has accused Joe Biden of having sexually assaulted her, decided to bring suit? Think Kirschner would go on MSNBC to bemoan the right of Biden’s lawyers to cross-examine her? Rhetorical question.
Ping to Liberal Media Criticism list.
Bet Kirshner would have no problem with the cross-examination of Tara Reade.
Exactly.
can’t even remember the year....
“legal analyst Glenn Kirschner said that cross-examining people who claim to be sexual assault victims, such as Trump accuser E. Jean Caroll, is a “disservice.””
Unless the victim is a Conservative accusing a Liberal of sexual assault then multiple doses of truth serum is AOK.
Kirshner’s Kangaroo Kourt.
To the msm- As they say “ahhh shaddap ya wankers”-
So it should be a “dis-service” to cross examine Tara Reade right?
bet this lady kept a diary...at least a daybook...which is how she was able to write the book...read the book...i think likely plenty of evidence that a daybook was kept.
F***ing nutcase.
She is clearly a mental nutcase.
Sometimes the story IS made up. E. Jean Carroll has provided conflicting testimony in the court of public opinion, and there is no known physical evidence that ANYTHING has ever happened.
False memories, engendered by the #MeToo movement, maybe?
That ‘legal analyst’ would have been a hoot in the Juanita Broaddrick vs Clinton trials, which never occurred because democrats reversed that crime into Clinton being the victim.
Broaddrick was actually very convincing against Clinton, and there is no doubt that Clinton did rape her.
But, the real problem is that, when it comes to democrat criminals, they have all been protected by the left-wing media and fellow democrats in congress. The mean ‘real victims’ are now being prosecuted by the ‘real criminals’. It’s an upside-down world now.
Yeah because you’d hate for someone to be caught in a lie
Yeah, I mean Trump should have no avenues to use to prove his innocence. It just ain’t fair.
I just watched one of those crime shows where a district attorney was laying out the requirements to pursue a rape conviction. He had DNA evidence, but he said that was not enough because he said the guy could maintain it was consensual.
This woman has no evidence, can’t even narrow it down to the year it happened. All she has is a fake emotional distress on the witness stand.
Well, if that’s the case, who would bring on her case?
As I understand it, there were no witnesses.
Does anyone know if the photo of her and her husband posing with Trump, took place before or after the alleged rape?
The truth is toxic to the left. They will go to any lengths to avoid and suppress it. It’s their kryptonite.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.