AIBU in thinking a drunken 18 year old boy should not be called to account for behaviour 35 years later?

[longwayoff]

I'm conflicted. Brett Kavanaugh, nominated by Trump as a Supreme Court judge, has been accused of locking Dr Christine Blasey Ford in a bedroom and sexually assaulting her. This happened in the early 1980s when they were teens at a party and he was very drunk, she hadnt been drinking. She says she is 100 percent certain he did this. He says wasn't me guv.
Her televised evidence was upsetting and convincing. I believe what she says and feel she should have whatever she needs to help her. BUT. Drunken 18 year old boy/man. All these years later? Is that fair? To wreck his career now? Personally, I loathe Trump and all his works, so politically I'm glad to see a fail. But this is not sitting well with me. I feel I should feel better about this. Convince me please.

Right, so reporting assault is more like reporting witnessing an attempted murder (your own or other)? You may not be believed?

In which case, are you more likely to be believed by leaving it unreported for over 30 years?

(Deeply sorry for all victims of any crime, btw)

Coming forward to say that you are the victim of a crime is completely different. You are the one who has to undergo a painful and humiliating rape exam.

Isn't she accusing him of assault not rape?

I guess when the person who allegedly committed the assault is just joe bloggs who hasn’t reoffended and appears to be living a quiet life, but when he is to become one of the most powerful men in America and can effectively control the lives, particularly of women, of millions, then he should be held to account.

It’s clearly about preventing a man of dubious character and a poor moral compass assuming such an important and powerful role.

As such it’s the right thing to do.

Reminds me of the Stephen King story about the man about to be elected president is exposed as a coward and immoral.

Dr Ford can hopefully Exocet Judge Kavanaugh

If your home is burgled, your stuff riffled through and broken, over-turned, messed up, and some stolen, you are thoroughly traumatised. There is no hesitation in reporting because the evidence is incontrovertible.

What if the police's first line is to question whether you locked the door, whether you had ever allowed someone, anyone access or given them your belongings? What if they said that it was your own fault you'd been burgled because you once gave a stranger some help and so were obviously someone who just gave your stuff away?

So there you are, feeling thoroughly violated and traumatised, in what is supposed to be your nice safe home, with the police basically telling you that it's your own fault, that you must have broadcast to the burglar that they were welcome to help themselves to your things just by your lifestyle and personality.

Actually that is exactly what they did say when we were burgled - that had we double locked the door they wouldn't have got in and if we had taken our car keys upstairs and my handbag too they wouldn't have stolen our car or our money cards etc.

Fair enough to be honest. We should have done more to protect ourselves and we took their advice on board.

brownpaperteddy. Your door was closed, it's not an invitation to come in. I'm appalled that you were subjected to that response.

I would expect that from an insurance company though.

Yep both doos closed just not double locked.

The response was valid and deserved to be fair. We could and should have done more to protect ourselves and now we do. The fault still lies with burglar but we made it easier for them to target us.

Insurance company were fab. Not a murmur from them at all.

Here you go, OP. Aren't you happy? The majority of the Republican party agrees with you. Even if BK truly did everything Dr. Ford reports, he still deserves to be on the SC (they say). For that matter even 29% of Democrats think these actions being proven still wouldn't necessarily disqualify BK of being on SC.

So that's alright then (head in hands).

30 years ago next month I was raped. I didn't report it and the only person I told was my best friend. It has affected every single part of my life since then and was a factor in the breakup of my marriage and is a big reason why I've stayed single and celibate for the last 17 years. You'd better believe that if the person who did it was ever up for election for anything I'd come forward and name and shame him. No-one that can do something like that deserves to carry on and be successful while their victim has to live with what was done to them everyday. As it is, I believe his life is pretty shit these days. I don't pity him.

I have been reading #WhyIDidntReport on Twitter.

Setting aside

It's the crazy overwrought response that really suits his new role, he'll clearly fit right in with the other OTT republicans; because if you shout/weep loudly enough you clearly must be innocent. What a circus America has become, cannot see any moral high ground anywhere in the ridiculous sideshow USA politics has descended into.

I think it takes a particular type of person to even be capable of something like this at any age. Raping someone is not some youthful 'mistake', it's an act of intimate brutality and a serious crime and at 18 he was legally as well as morally responsible for. I see absolutely no reason to feel uncomfortable with his being held to account for it after however long it's been. All the more so when he's been nominated to one of the most powerful roles in the land and could be holding sway over things like abortion rights. Why on earth would you waste any sympathy on him? What about the poor woman who has carried this trauma with her all these years while he enjoyed an illustrious career etc?

If this act was too long ago to matter, why does the vetting questionnaire BK had to complete ask wide-ranging questions without time limit that mean it was disclosable?
If you believe Ford then it follows BK has perjured himself in writing and at the hearing. If perjury does not disqualify a person from becoming a judge, well, I give up.

Also because he will be sitting in judgment on others and this makes him a special kind of hypocrite.

If perjury does not disqualify a person from becoming a judge, well, I give up.

Precisely.

The most emotional person must be the person telling the truth. :(

I think the most damaging thing about his evidence was his aggressive come back to the woman who questioned him about if he drank to the point of blacking out. He didn’t really answer except to say he doesn’t have a drink problem (now) however, now former classmate has come forward to say he definitely did.

He's a liar and honestly I think he's an alcoholic. The way he reacts with rage when questioned about his drinking, despite many witnesses saying he was known for being drunk and aggressive, really scares me.

If he would say "Yes I had an alcohol problem as a teen, I did a lot of bad things, I genuinely do NOT think I did this and I do NOT remember it but I apologize if I had any improper behaviour towards anyone" I would be more forgiving. Instead he screams and shouts and claims it's a conspiracy theory.

Brokshelly
I think he’s an alcoholic as well. Most unsuitable judge.
I don’t think it’s strange that an assault victim would wait this long. She’s getting on with her life, putting it aside and then this twat pops up in line for a prestigious job for life like this!,, it’s got to bring it all back to the surface.

Havabiscuit I was listening to a podcast and two of the political journalists are recovering alcoholics, they both said that his behaviour rings alarm bells for them.

Exactly. What compounded the allegations tenfold was Kavanaugh's hysterical and laughable reaction in being questioned about it. Ford was measured and credible, Kav is a drunken fruitloop and thoroughly undeserving of high office.

He has also perjured himself several times under oath. Not a good look for a judge.

I think the most damaging thing about his evidence was his aggressive come back to the woman who questioned him about if he drank to the point of blacking out.

Yes and the senator (Amy Klobuchar) began her question explaining she grew up with an alcoholic father. So his response was so egregious, knowing she had a history with alcohol abuse in her family.

This now has nothing to do with BK, Dr Ford, #metoo, women, rape, sexual assault, beer, perjury or any of the other stuff.

The Republicans want to MAGA, by which they mean make it a place where rich white men and their families can continue to profit from the hard work of other people and from the country’s natural resources (or one of the many of the supporting roles to keeping things in order for these rich white men - politicians, judges etc).

They will do and say whatever it takes to get BK appointed. They are so incensed by anyone daring to even question (let alone jeopardize) their God-given due, that you even have a SCOTUS nominee openly and brazenly shouting out, in front of the Senate, his political allegiance, and threatening those who don’t agree with him (“what goes around, comes around” was breathtakingly shocking).

I don’t even think this is the lowest it will go. Women’s rights - women - are absolutely nothing to them. They’re just things to allow them the sexual release they’re entitled to, and to carry and raise the next generation in their image. Liberals are going around beating their chests and emoting - and the Republicans are literally not even paying attention. They’ve got too much money and power and righteousness to lose, and they’ll be damned if a bunch of women (of all things) take that away from them.

(This is also why so many female Republicans back BK. If their husbands’ and fathers’ ships go down, so do they. In fact the whole house of cards tumbles around them).