That is not going to give the GOP Senate majority pause from what I now understand. The GOP majority is rushing ahead to a vote to send his nomination to the full senate without regard to the reputation of the Supreme Court.
I’ve noted before that Kavanaugh’s failure to ask for a full investigation to exonerate himself so that he goes on the Supreme Court without this cloud hanging over he head is bothersome. In my experience that would be the first thing an innocent person would seek. Some have come up with reasons for him not to do it but none of them are substantial as far as I can see.
Kavanaugh claimed eleven times in his unprecedented interview that he wanted a fair process. The question is does he?
Kavanaugh has sat upon the Court of Appeals in the DC Circuit for 12 years. He certainly knows what a fair process is I would think. Imagine a case coming before him on appeal where the facts below showed a woman complainant said a man attacked her and attempted to take off her clothes. The man testified in his own defense that he did no such thing. The woman making the allegation said another person was present during the attack. She wished that he would testify and the judge hearing the case said no. How is that a fair process when the one witness not party to the dispute who can tell what he observed happening is not called.
This though is not a trial but a more significant matter where the question is the fitness of a person for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. Even more, I suggest, would that other person be needed to gain a good understanding of the matter. Now we have two more women who can testify to the character of the man who is seeking that job. Isn’t it necessary that they be heard or are interests of justice best served in not hearing any further negatives about the person in line for the appointment even though knowledge of these alleged wrongdoings are widespread throughout the land? How does hiding these matters serve the country?
The most odd thing about this proceeding is the way in which the senators on the committee have hired an outside female prosecutor to come in to examine the female witness. They obviously want her to do so in a way that will affect her credibility. Fearful of doing it themselves, they parcel out this to a prosecutor with over 20 years experience. I’m not so sure this will play out the way they intend.
This woman prosecutor will be cross-examining Dr. Ford. I wonder how many times she has had the experience of cross-examining a woman witness in a sex matter. Usually the woman is the victim and is not cross-examined by a prosecutor. I wonder how much experience she has had cross-examining people. Prosecutors without experience as defense counsel, which she does not have, are not very adept at that skill.
Defense lawyers who work at it daily are the best at it. The good ones like one of my brothers have it in their blood. They are skilled, whether male or female, at questioning female witnesses while keeping the sympathy of the jurors. I suggest the Senate Republicans have erred in bringing in a female prosecutor to go after Christine Blasey Ford. A female, or even male, criminal defense lawyer used to cross-examining women would be far superior.
We will know more in a couple of hours.