Expert concludes Roy Moore wrote disputed entry in accuser's yearbook, lawyer says

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: MotherMayEye

But neither side can.

Actually, they can take it to civil court... the accuser for damages and Moore for slander.

I am certain the statute of limitations expired decades ago for damages from any sexual assault or harassment.

Any civil case would be based on slander/defamation. Whichever side were to file would have the burden of proof. Of course, you have to consider that 'Truth' is an affirmative defense.

A defamation case would go nowhere for anyone involved in these allegations (Moore and his accusers).

a reply to: MotherMayEye

You may well be right.

I'll admit I am a bit frustrated over this whole affair. While I give Moore the benefit of the doubt (and nothing at this point short of absolute irrefutable proof will change my vote), there will always be that question in the back of my mind: what if they were telling the truth? Granted, it's a tiny question mark for me, but it does exist.

That's my source of ire for these accusers: why would they wait until the last possible moment to come forward? If they are telling the truth, their procrastination has placed me in a moral dilemma that I cannot completely resolve, and if they are lying their lies are an absolutely despicable act that is worthy of exile from civilized society. They have no innocent option. Moore, if guilty has engaged in similarly despicable acts, but if innocent... he has done nothing wrong.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

That's my source of ire for these accusers: why would they wait until the last possible moment to come forward?

They didn't "come forward." They were approached when the reporters were told about Moore's (alleged) antics.

a reply to: TheRedneck
I do not understand waiting 40 years.

I honestly don't.

Moore was a greater danger when he was younger and under the national radar. These accusers left him with 40 years of preying on young girls? And for no good reason that I have heard.

And turning to Gloria Allred for representation? I cannot possibly be expected to take Gloria Allred seriously and that is a real shame if Beverly Nelson is telling the truth. She chose very poor legal representation/PR if she wanted her claims to be taken seriously.

That's the real lesson here. If any accuser wants to be taken seriously...find a good, ethical, noncontroversial lawyer, take the appropriate legal path to get justice, and trust that the media will find the story. You will appear more credible than if you let Gloria Allred represent.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Is Allred representing the others?

a reply to: Phage

That's a problem for me. What did these reporters do? Walk up to random people on the street and ask, "Were you ever sexually molested by Roy Moore?"

Or did they maybe take out an ad in the local newspaper: "Wanted: someone to claim sexual misconduct from Roy Moore. Leave message at 555-1234"?

Maybe they went word-of-mouth: "Excuse me, have you ever been accosted by Roy Moore? No? Well, please ask your friends and neighbors!"

TheRedneck

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: TheRedneck

That's my source of ire for these accusers: why would they wait until the last possible moment to come forward?

They didn't "come forward." They were approached when the reporters were told about Moore's (alleged) antics.

This.

The reporters were down in Alabama covering other angles of the election, and heard whispers of Moore's behavior from locals. They then found these women and approached them to ask about the rumors.

These women didn't suddenly, out of the blue come forward...

And the media didn't go "fishing" looking for this, apparently it was a well-known and open secret down in those parts, and easily overheard by reporters covering the election.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Or did they maybe take out an ad in the local newspaper: "Wanted: someone to claim sexual misconduct from Roy Moore. Leave message at 555-1234"?

Easy enough to find out.


You didn't read the original article?

a reply to: Phage

No.

But that doesn't mean that Nelson and Allred aren't toxic to the other accusers in the court of public opinion...which is all there is, unfortunately. And it doesn't mean it's fair or right.

But it is what it is.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Yeah.
And Moore is going to win. And he won't be going before the Ethics Committee.

originally posted by: Kettu
The reporters were down in Alabama covering other angles of the election, and heard whispers of Moore's behavior from locals. They then found these women and approached them to ask about the rumors.

This is definitely not enough detail to even consider.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Yeah.
And Moore is going to win. And he won't be going before the Ethics Committee.

Like I said earlier...I wouldn't be surprised if he loses.

But if he does win, I agree...no ethics committee is going to investigate seriously.

a reply to: MotherMayEye
I'm sure you read the original article. There's quite a bit of detail.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: MotherMayEye
I'm sure you read the original article. There's quite a bit of detail.

This article?

Link

Or do you have another link you want me to read?

a reply to: Kettu

And the media didn't go "fishing" looking for this, apparently it was a well-known and open secret down in those parts, and easily overheard by reporters covering the election.

Riiiiiiight.

So these reporters found out so easily about a supposed open secret that I had never heard in a lifetime of living so close?

Riiiiiight.

I got some oceanfront land in Kansas I'm selling cheap.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Phage

I've read a lot of articles. Not one ever mentioned an ad for people to accuse Moore of rape.

Got a link?

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

So you represent everyone living in Alabama?

Riiiiiiight.

Nice use of the anecdotal logical fallacy.

a reply to: Kettu

If I had never heard of it, it's certainly not a very open secret, is it?

But of course, people would open up all the dirty laundry to a reporter they have never met... just 'cause.

TheRedneck

a reply to: SRPrime

Regardless, a yearbook signature doesn't prove abuse, it would just prove she met him once.

That was the whole point of the year book in the first place.
To prove that moore lied when he said he didn't know her.
Not to prove abuse.

a reply to: MotherMayEye
The original article:
Moore