You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour

‘If I believe it, it is true’.  This seems to be the prevailing attitude in today’s self-centred society.  This attitude is promoted by people who should know better and it is dangerous because it undermines our democracy and results in a divisive society.  Democracy can only function by application of the cardinal virtues that are underpinned by the truth.  In the absence of revelation truth must be absolute, factual and objective.  Much of what is said and written is opinion, and opinion without evidence is nothing more than bigotry and prejudice.

Our memories of events can play tricks on us, especially as time goes by.  Police investigators know that four witnesses to an incident will recount four different versions of what happened and believe they are telling the truth.  So it is only the bits they agree on that can be relied on.  This is a simple fact of life.  If all four say they did not witness anything because they were not there, then it must be concluded it never happened.  This is the situation with Professor Ford’s allegations of sexual assault made against Judge Kavanaugh.  Compelling (if unbelievable) though her testimony was, and despite the Judge’s willingness to forgive injuries and bear wrongs patiently on the basis that she was mixed up and mistaken, this is not a situation of false memories after thirty-five years being retrieved during a course of therapy.  Professor Ford, due to her education, training and profession, knew exactly what she was doing.  Even though Judge Kavanaugh has been exonerated, the mass of people who still believe her describe her as a survivor of sexual abuse and a victim.  She may have experienced some other assault, but it is certain that she is a victim.  A victim of misuse by activist political lawyers affiliated with the US Democratic Party.

She is herself active on behalf of and a supporter of the Democratic Party.  She was directed to those lawyers by Democratic Party Senators on the Judiciary Committee.  To say that this situation was contrived is an understatement.  Her allegations made in confidence were leaked without her consent.  She may have been a willing victim, but she was still misused.  Her lawyers claim they were working pro bono.  She was not paying them, but that does not mean that someone else was not.  She does not know, and she does not know who paid for her polygraph test.  It does seem that the delay in giving her testimony was deliberate.  She was kept in the dark by her lawyers who did not tell her that investigators were prepared to fly out to her, when they advised the Committee that she was afraid of flying.  It can be assumed that they were delaying so that she could be coached.  Watching the Confirmation Hearing, in full and live on television, I came to the conclusion that she was being used by activist lawyers, just like Norma McCorvey [RIP] who we know was the Jane Roe in the infamous Roe-v-Wade Supreme Court decision.  Which is the reason why her allegations were made in the first place, in fear of the Judge being instrumental in overturning that decision.

Republican Party Senators on the Judiciary Committee appointed Rachel Mitchell (Chief of a Special Victims Division in Arizona) as Counsel to cross-examine the Professor.  In her report to the Committee she stated that Ford’s testimony was totally inconsistent and a reasonable prosecutor would not move forward based on this evidence.  The FBI conducted an additional investigation in to Ford’s allegations and found they could not be corroborated.  A second unrelated accuser who also came across as vague and confused, Deborah Ramirez, was also interviewed by the FBI with negative results.  A third accuser, Julie Swetnick, was not interviewed because her allegations were not credible.  She recanted some of her allegations and of the four people she claimed could support her description of house parties at that time, one was dead, one did not recall Swetnick and two did not respond, according to NBC.  All the other people piling in to support allegations against the Judge had no direct evidence and relied on hearsay.

This whole affair is deeply disturbing and undermines confidence in politicians and the democratic process.  It concerns us because the UK is not immune from this cancer.  For further and more detailed information go to:

Following his confirmation and swearing-in, the Judge has appointed an all-female team of law clerks, one of whom is of black ethnicity.  Not bad for someone who supposedly disrespects women.  So far, the Women’s March organisation has not celebrated that undisputed fact.


One Response to You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour

  1. So true. In fact, I’ve had to unfriend many of my “friends” as I’m heartily fed up with the shouty opinionated stance, even from fellow Catholics. Call me naïve, but I enjoy debating respectfully and politely. For example I voted Remain in the referendum for many reasons and am quite happy to debate that. BUT I also have total respect and understanding as to why people voted leave. I have had death threats recently because of my pro life stance (not I hasten to add by any Catholics). It’s sad that those of us who respect other people’s view points are being drowned out by the “hard left” and “hard right” and moderates on both “sides” seem to being deliberately side lined. Very dangerous times I think.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s