Skip to main content

View Diary: A Case Study in Awful: The 8 Worst Parts of the Recent Naval Academy Rape Hearing (10 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  My generic response to these kind of things. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    slowbutsure, Lujane

    Almost all defense attorneys must impugn at the very least the honesty of the rape victim. It's their job.

    When you have situation in which all parties agree to the basic facts (they had sex) and there's no physical evidence of intoxication (and there almost never is, unless the victim goes straight to the hospital) the entire case is over who is telling the truth and how supposedly intoxicated the victim was.

    Then you get stuff like this:

    A friend of the accuser testified Monday that the woman had told her that any sex with Bush was probably consensual.
    Lt. Cmdr. Angela Tang, an attorney for Graham, said the alleged victim was the “sexual aggressor” and that it was not Graham’s legal responsibility to tell her to stop. “People drink and people have sex and it’s not a crime,” Tang said. “And that’s what this was.”
    •  perhaps it is their job, and we can have feelings (0+ / 0-)

      and think it disgusting and immoral how they do their job, and protest.

      Perhaps some day they won't be allowed to do certain things, argue certain ways, against rape victims. THere are all sorts of legal restrictions/rules for what lawyers can argue in various kinds of cases it seems to me (I say this as a lay person though).

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site