Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 2 Share on Twitter 1 Share on LinkedIn Share on Reddit Tell A Friend Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites
Best Web OpEds

Was Christine Blasey Ford's Questioning a Violation of Prosecutorial Standards?

Quicklink Submitted By   Follow Me on Twitter     Message DAVID KANEGIS     Permalink    (# of views)   1 comment

Related Topic(s): ; ; , Add Tags

Must Read 1   Well Said 1   Valuable 1  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H3 10/13/18

Author 512069
Become a Fan
  (2 fans)

During the Kavanaugh confirmation travesty, Republicans chose to use outside counsel to question the veracity of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford's sexual assault allegations.

This is not a point that we can afford to drop now that Kavanaugh is on the Supreme Court.

We need to continue to question all aspects of Kavanaugh's confirmation hearing.

'...Mitchell improperly leveraged her position as a prosecutor to further the goals of a private client. Prosecutors in this country are rightly held to a different standard than other lawyers.  This is not a partisan issue, and Mitchell’s conduct must not become accepted precedent in prosecutorial practice...'  Lucy Lang 


'Lucy Lang is the executive director of the Institute for Innovation in Prosecution at John Jay College of Criminal Justice.'



What do you think?





Read the rest of the story HERE:

At www.yahoo.com

 

- Advertisement -

Must Read 1   Well Said 1   Valuable 1  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com

David Kanegis is a Certified Professional Coach. He developed Mind Acrobatics(TM) a series of "self-empowerment" exercises and techniques designed to enable people to create and sustain life changes. Dave writes about everyday challenges (more...)
 

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon Share Author on Social Media   Go To Commenting

The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Follow Me on Twitter

Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles

Comments Image Post Quicklink Comment

These discussions are not moderated. We rely on users to police themselves, and flag inappropriate comments and behavior. In accordance with our Guidelines and Policies, we reserve the right to remove any post at any time for any reason, and will restrict access of registered users who repeatedly violate our terms.

  • OpEdNews welcomes lively, CIVIL discourse. Personal attacks and/or hate speech are not tolerated and may result in banning.
  • Comments should relate to the content above. Irrelevant, off-topic comments are a distraction, and will be removed.
  • By submitting this comment, you agree to all OpEdNews rules, guidelines and policies.
Connect with Facebook     Connect with Twitter            Register with Facebook     Register with Twitter

Comment:   

You can enter 2000 characters. To remove limit, please click here.

Please login or register. Afterwards, your comment will be published.
 
Username
Password

Forgot your password? Click here and we will send an email to the address you used when you registered.
First Name
Last Name

I am at least 16 years of age
(make sure username & password are filled in. Note that username must be an email address.)

1 people are discussing this page, with 1 comments  Post Comment


Maxwell

Become a Fan
Author 4952

(Member since Feb 15, 2007), 2 fans, 3892 comments


Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon


  New Content

Sorry, but I think this is grasping at straws. Not being a lawyer, I may be unaware of special requirements that may apply to a prosecutor, a public employee, but I see no conflict of interest between her regular job representing the people of Phoenix, AZ and this special job of advocating for Brett Kavanaugh and the Republican majority in the senate.

Any good lawyer would have made the argument the accusation of Christine Blasey-Ford was not a prosecutable crime. For sure, it should have been better rebutted. Kavanaugh was not on trial for a crime. If you apply for a job and the prospective employer finds something they don't like, you get passed over. No proof beyond reasonable doubt required. And this wasn't any job, this is one of the most prestigious public sector jobs in the US.

If this was a quasi-criminal investigation about anything, it was about who was lying under oath. In my opinion the one who was lying now sits on the supreme court, but it's only an opinion. Democracy had its say in the senate, and may well again in the mid terms. Hopefully it will arrive at the right decision this time.

Submitted on Friday, Oct 19, 2018 at 2:02:29 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (0+)
Help
 

 
Want to post your own comment on this Quicklink? Post Comment