XPost: talk.politics.guns, alt.rush-limbaugh, talk.politics.misc   
   XPost: alt.politics.republicans   
   From: me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net   
      
   "Governor Swill"  wrote in message   
   news:9s611ddpmg92308dllgdo9rs63grg54dg7@4ax.com...   
   > On Wed, 15 Nov 2017 20:06:25 -0500, "Scout"   
   >  wrote:   
   >   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>"Governor Swill"  wrote in message   
   >>news:1gop0dhgf4t76l6ko9lfc9fmc0r3hh9r5t@4ax.com...   
   >>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2017 01:41:23 -0500, "Scout"   
   >>>  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>"Governor Swill"  wrote in message   
   >>>>news:981l0d9gsl1trd5og9ijcuo3v7mi9mip2s@4ax.com...   
   >>>>> On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 13:55:15 +0000 (UTC), bks@panix.com (Bradley K.   
   >>>>> Sherman) wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>Klaus Schadenfreude   wrote:   
   >>>>>>>On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 13:26:20 +0000 (UTC), bks@panix.com (Bradley K.   
   >>>>>>>Sherman) wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>Klaus Schadenfreude   wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> ...   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>Four women, 26 corroborating witnesses.  No statute   
   >>>>>>>>>>of limitation in child molesting.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>If it was important to them, they'd have reported it immediately.   
   >>>>>>>>>They   
   >>>>>>>>>didn't. They're most likely lying.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>There are four women 26 corroborating witnesses.  In Alabama   
   >>>>>>>>they keep this shit quiet for powerful men.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>Of COURSE they did. All of them. Four women and 26 witnesses. None of   
   >>>>>>>them said anything.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>Thirty-eight years ago.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>That's very typical of child molestation cases.  Especially   
   >>>>>>in small towns.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Spousal and child abuse, especially sexual abuse, remains very   
   >>>>> underreported.  Typically such complaints aren't prosecutable anyway   
   >>>>> if there's no physical evidence.  Even then, it's his word against   
   >>>>> hers.  Most women don't want to go through the ordeal necessary to   
   >>>>> prosecute.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>Yet they are willing to make the accusations decades later?   
   >>>   
   >>> They know there will be no prosecution, no trial to endure and maybe,   
   >>> just maybe, they'll come out of it with enough bucks to pay their   
   >>> counsel.  But more likely, they see this as a chance to get revenge.   
   >>   
   >>Or, maybe, the person they are accusing will chose to sue them for slander   
   >>and hold them accountable for their allegations?   
   >>   
   >>Further as a politician who lives by their reputation, I doubt he would   
   >>even   
   >>need to establish harm in order to bring the suit.   
   >>   
   >>Because if you're going to publically make the allegation....you can be   
   >>held   
   >>legally accountable for it unless you can prove it's true in a court of   
   >>law.   
   >>   
   >   
   > Revenge.  Another characteristic of those who fail to live up to their   
   > own standards.   
      
   Revenge?   
      
   And if it's just self serving demonization?   
      
      
   >   
   > And what if the allegations are true?  What if they can be proven to a   
   > jury's satisfaction?  Such a law suit brings terrible risks with it.   
      
   Well then all the more reason for it to go to court.   
      
   And if they have the proof....why aren't they filing civil suits and   
   presenting their evidence in court?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)