"Me Too" Judge Roy Moore

[ZiprHead]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/woman-says-roy-moore-initiated-sexual-encounter-when-she-was-14-he-was-32/2017/11/09/1f495878-c293-11e7-afe9-4f60b5a6c4a0_story.html?utm_term=.07490e354c98

Two of Corfman’s childhood friends say she told them at the time that she was seeing an older man, and one says Corfman identified the man as Moore. Wells says her daughter told her about the encounter more than a decade later, as Moore was becoming more prominent as a local judge.

Aside from Corfman, three other women interviewed by The Washington Post in recent weeks say Moore pursued them when they were between the ages of 16 and 18 and he was in his early 30s, episodes they say they found flattering at the time, but troubling as they got older. None of the women say that Moore forced them into any sort of relationship or sexual contact.

 

[Elixir]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/woman-says-roy-moore-initiated-sexual-encounter-when-she-was-14-he-was-32/2017/11/09/1f495878-c293-11e7-afe9-4f60b5a6c4a0_story.html?utm_term=.07490e354c98

Two of Corfman’s childhood friends say she told them at the time that she was seeing an older man, and one says Corfman identified the man as Moore. Wells says her daughter told her about the encounter more than a decade later, as Moore was becoming more prominent as a local judge.

Aside from Corfman, three other women interviewed by The Washington Post in recent weeks say Moore pursued them when they were between the ages of 16 and 18 and he was in his early 30s, episodes they say they found flattering at the time, but troubling as they got older. None of the women say that Moore forced them into any sort of relationship or sexual contact.

Nothingburger. It's not like the guy hasn't done plenty of despicable shit that is already public nollidge.

 

[Derec]

So it seems like it was a consensual relationship, and the only thing wrong was that she was a year and a half or so younger than the arbitrary legal threshold. Looking at the  age of consent map, it looks like the young prosecutor and even younger Miss Leigh would have been fine in much of Latin America and even Europe. And as far as the other two girls, they were legal, so no problem there.

It is also predicated on the woman telling the entire truth. I am not saying she is lying, but we do not know one way of the other. She could also be mostly telling the truth, but embellishing key points, such as her level of aggressiveness.

This #metoo nonsense is putting Democrats in danger of becoming more puritan than Republicans. Everything is "harassment" or "assault" these days.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

So it seems like it was a consensual relationship, and the only thing wrong was that she was a year and a half or so younger than the arbitrary legal threshold. Looking at the  age of consent map, it looks like the young prosecutor and even younger Miss Leigh would have been fine in much of Latin America and even Europe. And as far as the other two girls, they were legal, so no problem there.

It is also predicated on the woman telling the entire truth. I am not saying she is lying, but we do not know one way of the other. She could also be mostly telling the truth, but embellishing key points, such as her level of aggressiveness.

This #metoo nonsense is putting Democrats in danger of becoming more puritan than Republicans. Everything is "harassment" or "assault" these days.

Well, I don't know about that. Since when has an out of control witch hunt based on spurious and unconfirmed allegations been any kind of danger?

 

[laughing dog]

So it seems like it was a consensual relationship, and the only thing wrong was that she was a year and a half or so younger than the arbitrary legal threshold. Looking at the  age of consent map, it looks like the young prosecutor and even younger Miss Leigh would have been fine in much of Latin America and even Europe.

Except that this was in the US and Moore is a lawyer. Apparently you feel it is okay to disregard the law.

 

[Ford]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/woman-says-roy-moore-initiated-sexual-encounter-when-she-was-14-he-was-32/2017/11/09/1f495878-c293-11e7-afe9-4f60b5a6c4a0_story.html?utm_term=.07490e354c98

Nothingburger. It's not like the guy hasn't done plenty of despicable shit that is already public nollidge.

Hey it was in Alabama. He should be given kudos for keeping it out of his immediate family...or even cousins!

 

[Derec]

Except that this was in the US and Moore is a lawyer. Apparently you feel it is okay to disregard the law.

I did not say that. What I was saying is that the law is pretty arbitrary here.
Also, it supposedly happened almost 40 years ago and is based on one woman's say-so.
There are plenty of legitimate points against Roy Moore, without engaging in this witch hunt.

 

[laughing dog]

Except that this was in the US and Moore is a lawyer. Apparently you feel it is okay to disregard the law.

I did not say that. What I was saying is that the law is pretty arbitrary here.

Which is irrelevant to the actual issue of Moore's conduct and its possible illegality. It does not matter whether something is legal somewhere else in the world.

Also, it supposedly happened almost 40 years ago and is based on one woman's say-so.
There are plenty of legitimate points against Roy Moore, without engaging in this witch hunt.

I agree that Roy Moore is an awful human being without these allegations. Allegations about character and behavior are not necessarily a witchhunt. Are you saying that people should not be concerned about these allegations if they are true?

 

[Derec]

Which is irrelevant to the actual issue of Moore's conduct and its possible illegality. It does not matter whether something is legal somewhere else in the world.

I think it matters a great deal whether he sexually assaulted somebody or if they had consensual sex that was only illegal due to some technicality of the law.

I agree that Roy Moore is an awful human being without these allegations. Allegations about character and behavior are not necessarily a witchhunt. Are you saying that people should not be concerned about these allegations if they are true?

Well there is really no way to determine how much of it may be true, given the passage of time. So why engage in this witch hunt today?

 

[laughing dog]

I think it matters a great deal whether he sexually assaulted somebody or if they had consensual sex that was only illegal due to some technicality of the law.

Moore was a lawyer. The law is the law regardless of what you think of a law. Either he violated the law or he did not. When you make these irrelevant excuses for possible criminal behavior, it reduces the force of your complaints about alleged illegal behavior in other situations.

Well there is really no way to determine how much of it may be true, given the passage of time. So why engage in this witch hunt today?

How do you know what is determinable or not?

Do you realize that with every response, it appears you are tacitly condoning his possible illegal or slimy behavior?

 

[Derec]

Moore was a lawyer. The law is the law regardless of what you think of a law. Either he violated the law or he did not. When you make these irrelevant excuses for possible criminal behavior, it reduces the force of your complaints about alleged illegal behavior in other situations.

The law is the law, sure. But this, if it happened, happened 38 years ago. Almost impossible to prove in court. So the aim of the allegation is not about the law, but about inflicting political damage. Hence me calling it a witch hunt.

How do you know what is determinable or not?

How would you determine it? There were only two people with first hand knowledge, and it supposedly happened almost 4 decades ago.
How do you propose finding out what really happened barring some sort of time viewing device?

Do you realize that with every response, it appears you are tacitly condoning his possible illegal or slimy behavior?

I do not think the US treatment of consensual sex in this case is in any way sane. If they engaged in consensual sex, I do not think that should be treated tantamount to rape just because of some arbitrary cutoff, nor do I think it should torpedo a political career 38 years later.

I mean it's not like he participated in a bank robbery that led to murder of two police officers and a guard, and our society seems to think having done that in 1982 is completely irrelevant, so why should some teenage nooky in 1979 be relevant now?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I agree that Roy Moore is an awful human being without these allegations. Allegations about character and behavior are not necessarily a witchhunt. Are you saying that people should not be concerned about these allegations if they are true?

Actually, yes. I would say that.

Decades ago, he had sex with people who were marginal around the age of consent and nobody got forced into anything. It's actually really trivial and warrants a slight shrug at best.

Now, if it gets less people voting for Roy Moore and more people voting against him, I'm all for burning him in effigy as a serial rapist who eats his victims and shit. Doesn't mean that it cracks the top 100 reasons to be against Roy Moore, though.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I agree that Roy Moore is an awful human being without these allegations. Allegations about character and behavior are not necessarily a witchhunt. Are you saying that people should not be concerned about these allegations if they are true?

Actually, yes. I would say that.

Decades ago, he had sex with people who were marginal around the age of consent and nobody got forced into anything. It's actually really trivial and warrants a slight shrug at best.

Now, if it gets less people voting for Roy Moore and more people voting against him, I'm all for burning him in effigy as a serial rapist who eats his victims and shit. Doesn't mean that it cracks the top 100 reasons to be against Roy Moore, though.

That sort of stuff matters to the religious right.

*hmpf*

*HMPF!!!*


BWAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!

 

[laughing dog]

The law is the law, sure. But this, if it happened, happened 38 years ago. Almost impossible to prove in court. So the aim of the allegation is not about the law, but about inflicting political damage. Hence me calling it a witch hunt.

This is about his character (or lack there of). Your characterization trivializes these allegations. I wonder why any disinterested person would want to do that.

How would you determine it? There were only two people with first hand knowledge, and it supposedly happened almost 4 decades ago.
How do you propose finding out what really happened barring some sort of time viewing device?

I am not proposing anything. But we don't know if there were witnesses, etc.... to any of this. Why do you assume it is not possible to find out?

I do not think the US treatment of consensual sex in this case is in any way sane. If they engaged in consensual sex, I do not think that should be treated tantamount to rape just because of some arbitrary cutoff, nor do I think it should torpedo a political career 38 years later.

Your opinion on that law is irrelevant to the issue. Either a lawyer broke the law or he did not. That is the issue.

I mean it's not like he participated in a bank robbery that led to murder of two police officers and a guard, and our society seems to think having done that in 1982 is completely irrelevant, so why should some teenage nooky in 1979 be relevant now?

Babbling does not help your position.

 

[Derec]

This is about his character (or lack there of).

Exactly. It's a character assassination. As such it doesn't have much to do with the law, contrary to objections of some other posters.
It was consensual sex. Big deal!

Your characterization trivializes these allegations. I wonder why any disinterested person would want to do that.

Because I think these allegations are pretty trivial.

I am not proposing anything. But we don't know if there were witnesses, etc.... to any of this. Why do you assume it is not possible to find out?

It would be very unlikely that there are any witnesses to any relevant acts (people usually have sex in private) and even if there were, memories get murky after such a long time. That includes the accuser herself.

Your opinion on that law is irrelevant to the issue. Either a lawyer broke the law or he did not. That is the issue.

How do you propose to prove it? Because the burden of proof should be on her, not on him.

Most cases that get tried after this long time are serious crimes with physical evidence. Things like murder, where you can exhume the body and go at it with some more modern forensic methods. For example, DNA would not have been used in 1979. Consensual sexual encounters are a different animal altogether.

Babbling does not help your position.

Just because you have difficulties comprehending anything more complex than "me too", doesn't mean that I am "babbling".

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

So it seems like it was a consensual relationship, and the only thing wrong was that she was a year and a half or so younger than the arbitrary legal threshold. Looking at the  age of consent map, it looks like the young prosecutor and even younger Miss Leigh would have been fine in much of Latin America and even Europe. And as far as the other two girls, they were legal, so no problem there.

It is also predicated on the woman telling the entire truth. I am not saying she is lying, but we do not know one way of the other. She could also be mostly telling the truth, but embellishing key points, such as her level of aggressiveness.

This #metoo nonsense is putting Democrats in danger of becoming more puritan than Republicans. Everything is "harassment" or "assault" these days.

Roy Moore was a pedophile. Suck it up. It is going to be interesting to watch this unfold and if it will sink the old bastard's election effort. That will be December 12. How much sleaze will the Alabama electorate tolerate?

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

I do not think the US treatment of consensual sex in this case is in any way sane. If they engaged in consensual sex, I do not think that should be treated tantamount to rape just because of some arbitrary cutoff, nor do I think it should torpedo a political career 38 years later.

Why don't we do this, for starters: have some intrepid journalist delve into cases prosecuted or heard by Roy, to see if he ever went after or sentenced anyone because they violated that "arbitrary" cutoff. Just for some perspective.

 

[Derec]

Roy Moore was a pedophile.

No, he was not.

14 years old is well past puberty. Pedophilia is sexual attraction to prepubescent children.
And she is not even alleging that they fucked. So, this is much ado about nothing.

Suck it up. It is going to be interesting to watch this unfold and if it will sink the old bastard's election effort. That will be December 12. How much sleaze will the Alabama electorate tolerate?

I dislike Roy Moore's politics, especially his theocratic leanings. However, this witch hunt makes him more sympathetic.

 

[KeepTalking]

The law is the law, sure. But this, if it happened, happened 38 years ago. Almost impossible to prove in court. So the aim of the allegation is not about the law, but about inflicting political damage. Hence me calling it a witch hunt.

Your characterization of it as a "with hunt" is incorrect. A witch hunt involves making accusations against someone because of who they are, rather than because of anything they actually did. The witches that were persecuted for hundreds of years weren't actually witches, for the most part. They were simply women who were ostracized from the community for one reason or another (sometimes simply for rejecting the sexual advances of powerful men in their community), and then retroactively accused and convicted of "crimes" they never committed.

In this case, an actual crime was committed, regardless of whether you agree that statutory rape is a crime, but there is no possibility that Roy Moore will be put on trial for that criminal action, given when it happened. This is simply a case of the public being informed of the moral actions a public figure has made in the past. It is par for the course if one wants to be involved in politics.

 

[ZiprHead]

If Moore was black, I imagine Derec's head would explode.

"Do I defend him because he has a skeevy attitude towards women?

or

Do I attack him because he's black?

AAAAAaaaahhh!!!"