Sex Crimes Prosecutor Blows Up ‘Credible’ Blasey Ford’s Testimony

3
543

The Arizona sex crimes prosecutor absolutely destroyed the testimony of the bedraggled Ms. Blasey Ford’s testimony. It is very clear in a letter addressed to “All Republican Senators” that she does not believe her story is ‘CREDIBLE’.

Rachel Mitchell wrote that her bottom line is that a case like this is difficult to prove but this case is even weaker. There isn’t enough evidence to bring it to trial.

“In a legal context, here is my bottom line: A ‘he said, she said’ case is incredibly difficult to prove,” the Arizona prosecutor said at the beginning of the memo (view it here).

“But this case is even weaker than that. Dr. Ford identified other witnesses in the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard.”

Ms. Mitchell found Ford’s account inconsistent.

Ford couldn’t give “a consistent account of when the alleged assault happened,” Ms. Mitchell wrote. In her conversations with The Washington Post, for instance, she said it was the “mid 1980s,” which shifted to the “early ’80s” in a letter to California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee. Therapy notes seemed to indicate she said it happened in her “late teens,” while Ford’s eventual account had her at age 15.

Ford narrowed it down to the summer of 1982, but Mitchell was skeptical.

“While it is common for victims to be uncertain about dates, Dr. Ford failed to explain how she was suddenly able to narrow the time frame to a particular season and particular year,” she wrote.

Referencing Ford’s therapist in 2012, Kavanaugh’s name did not come up. Her husband recalled hearing the name in 2012, when Kavanaugh was “widely reported in the press as a potential Supreme Court nominee if Governor Romney won the presidential election.”

Ford’s description of the party where it occurred and how she got home was another black hole.

“She does not remember in what house the assault allegedly took place or where that house was located with any specificity,” Mitchell wrote. “Perhaps most importantly, she does not remember how she got from the party back to her house.”

“She told the Washington Post that the party took place near the Columbia Country Club. The Club is more than 7 miles from her childhood home as the crow flies, and she testified that it was a roughly 20-minute drive from her childhood home.”

Ford couldn’t describe the drive back.

Ford “has no memory of who drove her or when. Nor has anyone come forward to identify him or herself as the driver,” Mitchell wrote.

“Given that all of this took place before cell phones, arranging a ride home would not have been easy. Indeed, she stated she ran out of the house after coming downstairs and did not state that she made a phone call from the house before she did, or that she called anyone else thereafter.”

The memo also notes the inconsistencies in Ford’s accounts of who was at the party;inconsistencies in her discussions with The Washington Post; and in the fact that Ford “refused to provide any of her therapy notes to the Committee.”

READ THE LETTER

Rachel Mitchell s Analysis on Scribd

Blasey Ford, literally, didn’t know anything.

Bill O’Reilly gave his own analysis.


PowerInbox
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
3 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments