SUPREME COURT FIGHT
Scrutinizing Kavanaugh’s past
Re: “Kavanaugh must now clear his name,” Sept. 19 editorial.
Please tell me that the editors of this newspaper know that in America it is not up the accused to prove his innocence, it is up to the accuser and the prosecutor to prove guilt, beyond a reasonable doubt.
Judge Kavanaugh’s name is already “clear.” He has an unblemished record for integrity and truthfulness.
He has undergone six FBI background investigations during his career. Sixtyfive women who knew him in high school have written a letter vouching for him as an honorable man who has always treated women with respect.
That is the sort of thing that jurors (in this case the American public) take into consideration in determining credibility. Against this, we have a woman who sat on her last minute, unsupported allegations of misconduct for 36 years and who cannot even remember whose house the alleged party was at, or even exactly when the alleged incident occurred.
So, Judge Kavanaugh, a man with an unblemished reputation, need not “clear his name.” It is up to Ms. Ford to prove her allegations by clear and convincing evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Richard Stacy, Highlands Ranch
Your headline above the editorial in today’s paper states that Judge Kavanaugh must now clear his name. I would ask how exactly he is supposed to do that? As soon as the accusation was made, the man’s entire life and career were completely upended.
His categorical denial and a sterling record as a jurist and a person are the only defense he can offer. Given the circumstances surrounding the charge and the utter impossibility that any credible investigation could shed further light, those might suffice.
In the era of #Metoo they will not. Your editorial makes that quite clear.
Judge Kavanaugh will not join the Supreme Court, regardless of the sterling nature of his character, his outstanding record as a judge, the veracity of his accuser or the eloquence of his defense. At this point in our history, there is no way forward for him.
By accepting this nomination, he perhaps unknowingly became the target upon whom the left would unleash every weapon in its arsenal. Now he has been nuked. Rather than joining the nation’s highest court, he will be lucky to avoid being run out of public service altogether.
Republicans should have seen this coming. Trump’s next nominee had better be a woman. George Zepernick, Denver
According to the U.S. Department of Justice, approximately 1.8 million adolescents in the United States have been the victims of sexual assault.
Research conducted by the Centers for Disease Control estimates that approximately 1 in 4 girls are sexually abused before the age of 18.
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Criminal Victimization Survey, in 2012, there were 346,830 reported rapes or sexual assaults of persons 12 years or older.
The question of why no one will take appropriate action looms over the victim, selfworth is battered. As a result, only 30 percent of sexual assault cases are reported to authorities. We must create an expectation of fairness.
Sen. Chuck Grassley, Riowa, is attempting to orchestrate a Supreme Court confirmation hearing in which no FBI investigation of sexual assault allegations has occurred.
Dr. Christine Blasey Ford has taken a lie detector test, Judge Brett Kavanaugh has not. Therapy session notes provide corroboration. Absent adequate fact finding, we will not know if an attempted rapist has been elevated to the Supreme Court. Mona W. Clark, Loveland
How typical. You conveniently ignore anything that doesn’t fit your narrative. This is a cleverly concocted hoax, nothing more. “I can’t really remember what year or where it happened, but I’m absolutely positive it was them.”
What a crock! Certainly she has suffered some trauma in her life, but it wasn’t this.
This is a story so well put together, it is impossible to refute. Let’s get on to the vote. Lee J. Reynolds, Lakewood
The juxtaposition of The Post editorial and political cartoon with the letter to the editor by Stan Moore “Of course the Kavanaugh bombshell was strategic” in today’s Denver was not lost on me.
Moore labeled Judge Kavanaugh’s “pawing” of a girl at an underage party three decades ago as a stupid teenage stunt.
Though a 71yearold man, I can distinctly remember my teenage years and the myriad drinking parties I attended. If I’d been paid for each “kegger” and “woodsie” I stumbled through, I could have paid cash for a car right out of college.
However, no matter what the stage of my youthful intoxication, there was never a time where attempting to attack a female partygoer would have crossed my mind.
My built in governor, I suppose, was my solid middleclass, midWest upbringing, and the consistent message from my parents about respect for others. This included very specific advice from my father to always respect women, a special admonition from my oldschool, unpretentious dad which never seemed patronizing.
These I believe closely relate to the most crucial points of the editorial and cartoon; that attempted rape is not a normal youthful indiscretion which is a fact not changed by the passage of time. Bruce Mendelson, Aurora
As a voting senior citizen I couldn’t care less what Kavanaugh is accused of by some little sweetie pie when he was 15 or 16 years old, 35 years ago.
Let’s turn loose the FBI on every senator and find out what they did in daddies’ car when they were 16 or 17 years old. We wouldn’t have any senators left.
This is just another dirt, smear, campaign, which is what Democrats do best and that’s all. Hank Urbanowicz, Englewood