Outside counsel tells Republican senators 'reasonable prosecutor' would not bring Ford case against

[mystery-ak]

Outside counsel tells Republican senators 'reasonable prosecutor' would not bring Ford case against Kavanaugh

By Ariane de Vogue, CNN Supreme Court Reporter

Updated 7:03 AM ET, Mon October 1, 2018
Washington (CNN)In a memorandum to Republican senators, Rachel Mitchell says a "reasonable prosecutor" would not bring a case against Brett Kavanaugh based on Christine Blasey Ford's sexual assault allegation given the evidence presented to the Judiciary Committee.

But Mitchell, the sex crimes prosecutor hired by Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans who questioned Ford last Thursday, also notes, "A Senate confirmation hearing is not a trial, especially not a prosecution."

Mitchell cites inconsistencies in Ford's statements to the committee, The Washington Post, and her therapist about the alleged assault, which Ford alleges took place when she and Kavanaugh were in high school.

Mitchell also notes the lack of corroboration of Ford's account, including recalling details that could back her story.

more
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/30/politics/rachel-mitchell-kavanaugh-ford/index.html


this site has her full report
https://heavy.com/news/2018/09/rachel-mitchell-memo-christine-blasey-ford/

[skeeter]

She said this immediately following the hearing, yet I didn't see it reported anywhere but Breitbart.

[mystery-ak]

BREAKING: Sex Crimes Prosecutor Rachel Mitchell COMPLETELY EXONERATES Judge Kavanaugh in NEW REPORT!
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/09/breaking-sex-crimes-prosecutor-rachel-mitchell-completely-exonerates-judge-kavanaugh-in-new-report/

[Applewood]

I guess it's a no-brainer for me since I worked for lawyers, but Ms. Mitchell is correct.   With no corroborating witnesses or evidence, any prosecutor who tried to bring a criminal case like this claim to court would either be laughed out or thrown out of court.

[dfwgator]

I guess it's a no-brainer for me since I worked for lawyers, but Ms. Mitchell is correct.   With no corroborating witnesses or evidence, any prosecutor who tried to bring a criminal case like this claim to court would either be laughed out or thrown out of court.

But what matters is the "Court of Public Opinion", and let's face it.  A lotta stupid people in this country.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I guess it's a no-brainer for me since I worked for lawyers, but Ms. Mitchell is correct.   With no corroborating witnesses or evidence, any prosecutor who tried to bring a criminal case like this claim to court would either be laughed out or thrown out of court.

She actually went further than that:

"Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard."

[austingirl]

But what matters is the "Court of Public Opinion", and let's face it.  A lotta stupid people in this country.

A lotta stupid resistors who refuse to notice that the predictions of war and depression have not come to pass- quite the opposite. Yet their hair is still on fire. They will believe the most outlandish things to confirm their bias.