Now, if a witness in a court case said they didn't remember a party 36 years ago, and the judge said that meant the party and the things that allegedly occurred at it never took place, wouldn't you wonder about the judge?
If the judge said the alleged crime committed was thereby refuted, would you wonder if the judge was being fair? Just because you don't remember something, doesn't mean you are refuting it, or even trying to refute it.
And, so we go to Brett Kavanaugh's opening statement during the hearing, and hear him say that the charge against him has been refuted, an apparent reference to Christine Blasey Ford's friend saying she does not remember the incident in question.
The lawyer for the friend, Leland Keyser, quickly responded that Keyser, "does not refute Dr. Ford's account, and she has already told the press that she believes Dr. Ford's account."
Thus we see Kavanaugh jumped to a false conclusion.
A judge should be able to discern the difference between not remembering an event and refuting an event. If he made this mistake while presiding over a case in court, he would be wrongly judging the case. If Kavanaugh jumps to false conclusions, and makes false connections, what type of a judge will he be?
No comments:
Post a Comment