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

a reply to: Xtrozero

Why? Statute of limitations for both civil and criminal are long past.

a reply to: Xtrozero

I haven't heard much from Leigh Corfman lately. I assume she's still out partying on what the Post paid her.

She'll be along when she sobers up... say Monday? The day before the election?

Timing is everything.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Phage

Statute of limitations for both civil and criminal are long past.

And this separates Corfman from Nelson.... how?

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I don't know.

Does it matter? Since neither is going to court.

a reply to: Phage

Does it matter?

You tell me. The question was why Allred wasn't representing Corfman, and you said because of the Statute of Limitations, but Allred is representing Nelson who is also subject to the Statute of Limitations.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Flatfish

Yeah well, Chief Justice Roy Moore thought so too and how did that work out for him?

It got him re-elected once.

And to what end? Just to get his dumb ass kicked off the bench again.

Problem is, the people who keep voting him into office think their success at getting him elected means they are entitled to religious based laws, but.........they’re not. Then a higher legal authority has to step in and remedy the situation by removing the religious zealot from the court.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
No, we didn't.

The Court is composed of the following:

• The Chief Judge of the Court, an appellate judge chosen by the Supreme Court from a court other than the Supreme Court.
  
• Two circuit judges and one district judge, chosen by the District Judges' Association.
  
• Two members of the Alabama State Bar and chosen by them.
  
• Three nonlegal professionals appointed by the Governor of Alabama with consent of the Alabama Senate

We do not elect members of the State Bar, nor do we elect members of the District Judges' Association. And remember who the Governor was until recently? Robert Bentley, the guy we kicked out of office for being an establishment hack.

You may not elect the State Bar, I’ll give you that one but that’s all. Even though you may not elect members of the District Judge’s Assoc., I’m sure ya’ll elected the pool of circuit judges and district judges they chose from to sit on the court. And.....ya’ll elected your governor and state senate as well.

So yeah, he was removed by the people of the state of Alabama who were duly elected and/or appointed to the position that gave them the authority and duty to take action in the matter.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
You might have been trying to say that, but it came out "I have absolutely no idea about Alabama politics."

No, you’re just making excuses for and attempting to deflect blame to those who had the sense, authority and duty to remove that nut-job from the bench.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
As if we needed any more proof of your total lack of understanding of Alabama politics...

Judge Moore based his decision on an Alabama Constitutional Amendment that had recently passed. It passed because the people of the state voted it in (I actually thought it was kinda silly, but it did pass overwhelmingly, probably in response to a previous issue concerning adoption). The US Supreme Court decided the people of Alabama didn't have the right to govern themselves, and handed down what was, in effect, legislation that overrode that amendment.

The decision was based on Alabama Law, not on his personal religious beliefs.

Give me a break! He was just as religiously invested in that Alabama Constitutional Amendment as anyone who voted for it. He has stated his belief that God’s law supersedes man’s law in many ways and on numerous occasions in the past.

To say his decision wasn’t based on his own personal religious beliefs is nothing but disingenuous and untruthful, to say the least.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
"Tiny little gun"? LOL, you might want to educate yourself on firearms too. That looked like a .38 snub... tiny gun, big bullets. When using a firearm, it is typically the bullets that do the damage. Not many people (around here anyway) throw their guns at attackers.

YMMV. Don't let me tell you how to use a firearm.

Didn’t look like a 38 to me, although I could be wrong. Personally, my smallest handgun is a 1911.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Actually, I asked why Allred would represent Corfman since the statute of limitations has long run out.

I think Allred is representing Nelson because there is physical evidence which indicates a relationship between Moore and Nelson. A relationship which Moore was, at first, equivocal about before denying entirely.

Allred is said to have submitted a request to the Ethics Committee to conduct hearings. My guess is that if the Committee does conduct an investigation the other accusers would be asked to testify. That being the case, they may choose to have Allred assist them, or not. At this point, it doesn't really matter.

a reply to: Flatfish

Problem is, the people who keep voting him into office think their success at getting him elected means they are entitled to religious based laws...

Oooh! A mindreader! That is impressive, I must say.

Or would be, except for the fact you aren't a mindreader.

You may not elect the State Bar, I’ll give you that one but that’s all.

No, that's not all. Go back and re-read my post.

S l o w l y this time, please. Those funny looking characters are tricky.

No, you’re just making excuses for and attempting to deflect blame to those who had the sense, authority and duty to remove that nut-job from the bench.

Yeah, I guess you're right. If they hadn't removed him from the bench the second time, he would still be a Judge and probably not looking to run for a national office... oh, wait.

Give me a break! He was just as religiously invested in that Alabama Constitutional Amendment as anyone who voted for it. He has stated his belief that God’s law supersedes man’s law in many ways and on numerous occasions in the past.

Did I say he wasn't happy to make the decision? Just because he made it based on Alabama Law does not mean he can't be personally happy about it. I'm sure he was.

Didn’t look like a 38 to me, although I could be wrong. Personally, my smallest handgun is a 1911.

Nice! I bet you could use it to swat that little gun away easy.

Let me guess: you don't waste money on bullets, do you?

TheRedneck

a reply to: Phage

You do realize the Senate Ethics Committee only conducts hearings on Senators, right? Convenient: if Moore loses, Jones wins and Allred has accomplished her goal. If Moore wins, Allred has to make up more, er, I mean present evidence and she can charge the DNC more.

Quite the little minx, ain't she?

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

You have evidence that Allred is not working pro-bono?

a reply to: Phage

Do you have evidence she is?

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

You know what, I was wrong.

If you are by any stretch of the imagination, representative of the majority of the Alabama electorate, they don’t deserve anything better than Roy Moore.

I should think he will literally represent the hell out ya’ll.

Good night.

a reply to: TheRedneck

It's your claim that she is being paid by the DNC.

You know how it works here.

I mean present evidence and she can charge the DNC more.

a reply to: Flatfish

You know what, I was wrong.

Don't feel bad. We all make mistakes. I made one earlier about when Etowah County went wet.

Good night.

Sleep tight!

TheRedneck

a reply to: Phage

It's your claim that she is being paid by the DNC.

You know how it works here.

Let's see... someone makes a claim.
Someone else refutes it.
They argue for three days and 12 pages.
One of them gets mad and leaves.

Is that about right?

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck
Not exactly.

Someone makes a claim.
Someone else asks for evidence to support that claim.
Someone says prove I'm wrong.

In this case, you would be "someone" rather than "someone else."

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: TheRedneck

You have evidence that Allred is not working pro-bono?

Did the document expert work for Pro Bono too? Somebody paid him....

a reply to: pavil

You seem very sure about that.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: pavil

You seem very sure about that.

Well that's because of my experience with Court experts in pathology cases.

They aren't cheap. And they never did it for free and you had to pay in advance. Take that as first hand experience.

What's your experience level in such matters?

a reply to: pavil

My first hand experience is similar, pavil. And I can't help but wonder if we had similar horrible experiences with getting expert witness opinions.

=(