A Reader's View: "An accusation isn't proof of wrong doing and he has the presumption of innocence until PROVEN guilty! Basic law there Chuckles!"
My Reply: You and I agree that accusation is not proof.
However, eye witness testimony - now offered by several credible accusers - does carry evidentiary weight in courts of law.
Even more fundamentally, Kavanaugh's senate hearings do not constitute a "Court of Law."
Rather, the purpose of these hearings is to present testimony in The Court of Public Opinion.
In The Court of Public Opinion, people pass judgment apart from "the rules of evidence" and "the presumption of innocence" that apply in Courts of Law.
This is how senate hearings are designed to play out. Fundamentally, Kavanaugh is the subject of a "job interview."
Yesterday, Trump himself admitted he could change his mind on Kavanaugh according to what he "sees" in today's testimony by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.
This distinction between a "Court of Law" and "The Court of Public Opinion" parallels the divergent outcomes of O.J. Simpson's two trials: O.J. was declared "not guilty" in "criminal court" but was convicted in "civil court."
Similarly, since polygraphs are sometimes unreliable, "lie detection" does not qualify as legal proof.
However, as a general rule, polygraph testing is far more reliable than not.
I have long noted that "conservatives" demand "perfection" whenever "perfection" works to their ideological advantage.
Then these same "conservatives" sign off on "imperfect" monstrosities like Trump without a hint of cognitive dissonance.
"Is Perfectionism A Curse? Paul Ryan Tells The Truth."
No comments:
Post a Comment