Almost the only way to do so in a "he said, she said" situation is to provide documentary, incontrovertible proof that each and every allegation is false. If accuser "A" states that Moore grabbed her breast on 8/15/1979 at approximately 9 PM CDT, Moore could prove that he was giving a speech in St. Louis at that date and time, providing physical proof that he couldn't be there. The character assassins could, of course, then discount victim "A", but what about Accuser "B" through Victim "H"? As he continues to provide incontrovertible proof that he could not possibly have been there for each accusation, they'll keep dragging "victims" out ("Victim" "I" through "Victim" "ZZ99") until they find one with a date and time that Moore cannot account for.
Fortunately, the people of Alabama are smart enough not to fall for this trap. But, still, I would question dragging character witnesses out...
Yes, but that yearbook. /s
I agree.
“Sending out character witnesses like this is typically a sign of weakness”
This is soft evidence supporting him. The evidence against him is also soft.
The 12 women supporting him are believable and paint a picture of a decent man.
Here’s the difference-—these 12 women would give the same statement under oath.
The 7 accusers will NEVER do so.
The statement that women must be believed about accusations is baloney. These statements like any another statements should have proof. Waiting almost forty years and then making the accusation right before an election is ludicrous and should cast doubt about the validity!!!
The loud voices of those with a megaphone who have taken every opportunity to vilify Judge Moore with unproven and unsubstantiated charges of sexual and/or inappropriate behavior have to be countered with voices from those who actually have a positive experience with the same man who is being maligned. I know of no basis for the assertion that presenting character witnesses for Moore is a sign of weakness for him or any other case of character assassination. In fact, the lack of honest people speaking out for Moore will be used as a negative to bolster the unproven charges made by a series of females with nobody coming forth to support their claims.Judge Moore is certainly being used to show all politicians what can and will happen to them if they do not tow their party line. And explains in large measure why we have our current corrupt govt.
Whoa, this will make the lead item of newscasts and above-the-fold front page headlines of newpapers...NOT!
If you had been charged, you would need character witnesses. It’s a sign of fighting back, an attempt to put a counterweight on the scale. Men do it all the time when charged with sexual harassment.
I disagree that this is a sign of weakness. Often there are people who intone where are those that speak well of the falsely accused. You cannot have it both ways.
Glad to see he’s fighting back, unlike all the Republican eunuchs.
That’s like saying that providing 3 references when applying for a job is a bad thing. Maybe it is, if they only have bad things to say!
A sad state of affairs when the onus is on the accused to prove a negative from 30 years ago.
1. He cannot defend himself.
2. All accusations are from many years ago. So, he’s either totally innocent or he reformed his character through maturity or Christian convictions.
3. Anything he is accused is minor compared to the many pervs, past (Barney Frank) and present (Al Franken) serving in elected office.
Therefore: I do not care about any accusations, whether true or false.
Go Roy