Posted on 03/24/2017 1:53:02 PM PDT by NYer
>Last night on his eponymous Fox News program, Tucker Carlson interviewed David Moyse, an attorney hired to defend 18 year-old Henry Sanchez-Milian, who is in this country illegally, against a charge of rape against a 14 year old girl in a bathroom at a Rockville, MD, high school. Moyse is one of those youngish (in his 30s) lawyers who gets himself on lists of up-and-comers, like this one, and is a name partner in a criminal defense firm.
In going on TV to make the case for his client, Counselor Moyse found himself being cross-examined and saying something he soon had cause to regret. So far as I know, Tucker Carlson has never attended law school, but his questioning skills outpaced the experienced attorney’s ability to answer.
SNIP
“Man, you better be right about this if you’re going to be impugning the character of a 14-year-old girl who says she was raped,” Carlson exclaimed. “Other people said they heard her screams. To impugn her character, you really before God better be sure that you are on the right side of this.”
Watch Moyse’s eyes, as he realizes that he has just admitted that as a matter of tactics, the victim would be put on trial for her character. And as the notion of putting his soul in jeopardy is broached.
“My only point to you,” the Fox News personality stated. “Have you thought through the moral consequences? I know you play a role and I’m glad that defense lawyers exist. But before you say something like that, do you think, ‘Man, I’m kind of putting my soul on the line a little bit?'”
The entire segment is worth watching:
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Just a guess .. ACLU?
More than likely.....DRUG CARTELS!
David Moyse sounds like Hillary Rodham
Amen
True words well said
Probably, "conveniently", forgot to take it with them when they fled El Salvador or whichever Central America country they left. Wonder if he was a passenger on one of Obama's refugee flights.
A 14 year-old-child -- literally, under the law -- cannot give "consent" to anything ... particularly to something involving an adult. What happened to her even if she "gave consent" is a rape and a very serious felony!
What is wrong with these people?! What is so hard to understand?!
Who hired the attorney?
So this brilliant, young attorney is saying that the sex was consensual? He admits that sex acts took place between his client and a 14-year-old?
Huh. I don’t suppose the Boy Wonder attorney has ever heard of statutory rape?
Sounds like, either way, the prosecution—and the victim!—win the case. Thanks, Junior!
...THE GIRL IS 14 YEARS OLD. By definition it is rape. GRRRRR...
In most states, yes. However, in its “wisdom” the state where this happened actually allows a 14 year to 16 year old girl to “consent” if the male involved is no more than 4 years older than her. This “consent” is going to be the defense for these illegal savages. Things that can be gotten away with in Guatemala, or Honduras, or Muslim countries aren’t necessarily the case here.
Yes, I understand the latter part of what you said very well. However, it’s difficult to shield when the whole matter has been made a national issue because politicians and liberal defenders want to make a political issue out of it. I understand shielding in court setting but I’m talking about national tv.
It’s just sad that we are at the point where left wing of this country is so hell bent on its own self destructive agenda that it can’t even have empathy with a victim of rape but rather with the perps who are here illegally and THEY are the ones being
“Shielded” by the school admin and the political left etc. In the name of cultural diversity, no doubt.
Gave her consent to be violated every which way in a school restroom?
You are correct and the difference in age IF he claims to be 18 in just several months short of a 4 year difference.
“you really before God better be sure that you are on the right side of this.”
What if he does not believe in God or hates him. What if he has a different set of standards and does not call them moral but still just?
Tucker could have slipped on this one. We do not all have the same value, even human values. e.g. look at Moslims.
I bet both of them have ALL their wisdom teeth.
Yep, and this lawyer just made a huge mistake because now the prosecution knows what angle he will be going for in defense. And will be more than prepared to counter. Plus he just admitted the incident happened.
"People who engage in sexual activity with children under the age of 16 (the age of consent under Maryland law) can be convicted of statutory rape or similar crimes. In statutory rape cases, the determinative fact is whether the child is underage. It does not matter if the child consents to or initiates the sexual activity.
"There is a possible mitigating circumstance -- the “Romeo and Juliet” exception -- but it does not apply in this case because of the ages of the rapists.
(In many states, including Maryland, lawmakers have enacted “Romeo and Juliet” exceptions to protect young people from criminal charges for engaging in consensual sexual activity with others close to their own age. For example, under Maryland's laws, a 19-year-old cannot be prosecuted for having sex with a 16-year-old, and a 15-year-old cannot be prosecuted for having sex with a 13-year-old.)"
Tucker mentioned in the discussion that others heard her screaming.
We've seen this before on the "national stage" when Hillary Clinton laughed about getting a man -- who she knew committed the rape of a young girl -- off with time-served.
Everyone has the right to equal representation under the law and the presumption of innocence. The only offense this attorney committed was appearing on Tucker's show..........It was a no win situation.
He's at the bottom of the totem pole and his firm chose him as the court appointed attorney...............
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.