Her willingness to slander a 12 year old may make her a good defense attorney and a necessary evil, but that doesn't mean she should be anywhere near public office.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Hillary Clinton Took Me Through Hell, Rape Victim Says
- Thread starter CrazyDude
- Start date
- Status
Her willingness to slander a 12 year old may make her a good defense attorney and a necessary evil, but that doesn't mean she should be anywhere near public office.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
So we shouldn't have defense attorneys in politics or as judges?
She had to defend her client. Youre saying people with a certain job shouldn't be in politics.
Aeriscloud
Banned
Right, because that's so much worse than the shit other politicians say.
If she was unwilling to question the accuser's viability she'd have been being unethical and not doing her duty as a defense attorney. How again is it slander?
"the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation."
Although I understand where you are coming from; it's a personal decision how you feel about people that take that job. But what other legal system do you imagine? One where defense attorney's don't bring up the fact that 12 year old's aren't great witnesses?
Child sex cases are awful all around; and it's understandable how the woman feels about Hillary Clinton. I doubt there are many child victims who've had to go to court who have anything but disdain for the defense attorney's involved.
I am not sure we are in a position to verify those statements. But that is secondary to the bolded part.
Politicians are exactly that.
Vermillion
Banned
What's your point?
Liu Kang Baking A Pie
Member
So what, though? Let's have standards.
Right, her willingness to do her job and defend a man 40 years ago doesn't make her fit for public office...
Are you actually serious?
echoshifting
Banned
The statement she made regarding a lie detector test, which aren't even admissible in court? A test he actually passed, in any case? That is thinking. Knowing would be based on objective facts.
I've a copyright defense lawyer for as a compatriot (I don't hold it against him), and he says a lot of cases turn into an impersonal battle between defense and the prosecutor. I can totally see business get dirty when one or both sides treat their clients like tools to defeat the other side.
Certainly not great to learn that Hillary is capable of this, but I guess a job is a job. She may have changed over the years, but I don't think the business of politics is that much cleaner than the business of law. It's probably worse, honestly.
Certainly not great to learn that Hillary is capable of this, but I guess a job is a job. She may have changed over the years, but I don't think the business of politics is that much cleaner than the business of law. It's probably worse, honestly.
It's just having somebody who did that much damage to a person get off so easy really pisses me off. I can see that it's more the victim getting fucked over by the system rather than anything that was Clinton's fault, but it still leaves me with a bad taste in mouth and skeptical at the whole anti-rape image Clinton's trying to build around herself.
Angelus Errare
Banned
NOW we want standards…
Aeriscloud
Banned
Where do we draw the line then? No, better still, when do we draw the line?
She did her job and set up a Rape Hotline in the state later.
Ummm...
On the tape, she suggests that she personally thinks he did it, but he has claimed otherwise.
Karsticles
Member
I think, if you read your post again, you will understand why I think she would have had to know, rather than merely thought.
Shamrock7r
Member
Just guessing, but I would guess more than half of defense attorneys run into or deal with a client that they know or feel may be guilty. It sucks. Not happy about it at all. I mean, she does have a choice though. At the risk of the development of her career, if she was confident in his guilt, she could have stepped away from the case, as far as I know? Someone was right on point here about the hypocrisy in the thread.
And that doesn't magically erase the shadiness behind her actions and own personal account behind this whole affair.
Nonsense, next you'll be telling me the last time she made these accusations was during another election cycle.
All lawyers lie on behalf of their clients. Prosecution and defense.
Sad thing is, however is that given our justice system she might well be telling the truth and her own attitude and intellect are muddying her testimony.
So defending someone involved in a crime associates you with supporting said crime?
No they don't, they argue the law.
Vermillion
Banned
So that other rape victims can go through the same thing? What's really the point? I guess it provides the illusion of helping.
OK I listened to that youtube audio.
If you're upset that a rapist of a 12 year old didn't get punished harshly. I think people should be more upset by the lab & prosecutor, not Hillary Clinton.
The audio is mostly just Hillary describing how she got the main evidence, which was underwear with a hole cut in it, thrown out.
David H Wong
Banned
Make it100%, within the first month on the job.
Pretty much.
Aeriscloud
Banned
Is she supposed to be at every possible rape victims house waiting for the rapist? How else do you help?
But there is literally no shadiness. Seems like she did her due-diligence.
To be clear, I do not like that this guy got off, and personally I think this as another stain on her image--even if I feel that that impression is illogical.
But objectively, she was perfectly ethical and in the grand scheme of things, maybe even moral in her actions.
Angelus Errare
Banned
This.
Never said she was supporting the crime. I don't know how you insinuated that from my post.
You said you were skeptical of Clinton's anti-rape image because she defended a rapist...
speculawyer
Member
How dare she be good at her job!
Lonewolf_92
Member
Not to mention her personal opinion of her client's guilt or innocence (as suggested by the lie detector comment and laugh) is immaterial to her doing her job, which was defending him against the charge. She was also in the right having the underwear thrown out (since the improper disposal of the removed piece precludes the defense from having their own experts examine the evidence). If she presented false evidence though, that would be another thing entirely, but they would have to prove that with more than the word of the victim.
Vermillion
Banned
Not directly contributing to the expected end result of these things is a start.
Devolution
Member
It honestly sounds to me like her client claimed innocence to everyone. She thought he was definitely culpable hence laughing at the polygraph being unable to spot whatever she could that would lead her to believe he is in a fact a rapist. But her beliefs would not interfere with her job and she represented him. Whether or not you want to get down on her for that is ultimately your choice but since then she's been a staunch advocate of women's rights. I'd rather the line of sight be on conservative women and Akin's ilk who are still throwing victims under the bus.
100% agree. She did her job, she clearly didn't like it, and she made an effort to try and make up for it afterward.
Where is the outrage for this? The prosecution and forensics dropped the ball hardcore and allowed this mofo to walk free.
Not that I am making a plea to emotion here, just pointing out the actual reason this is a thing.
speculawyer
Member
This lady is a bit confused. Hilary did not take her case, she took the case of a defendant. And I'm not exactly sure what 'lied on me' means.
I understand this woman being upset but she's upset at the wrong people.
Being a defense attorney is definitely a negative in my book, if you are running for office. Edit: Also a prosecutor for that matter.
What I'd like to know from Hillary, if she even deigns to respond. Is on what evidence she was basing her statement that the child had falsely accused others before. I don't think knowingly lying on affidavit, like the victim claims is part of a defense attorney's job.
Vermillion
Banned
Nope, try again.
Forceatowulf
G***n S**n*bi
My opinion on this "controversy" is that Hillary Clinton did some less than tasteful shit way back when and should be ashamed of it. Since it was quite a long time ago it's very possible she is and is no longer that kind of person.
As for my second opinion; I hope the GOP/her enemies finds more shit to smear her with so she decides not to run, or if she does decide to run it will be too much of a shit storm to actually get the nomination to run for the presidency.
Sorry, but I'm not looking forward to a possible 8 fucking years of the White female corporatist appeasing equivalent of Obama.
As for my second opinion; I hope the GOP/her enemies finds more shit to smear her with so she decides not to run, or if she does decide to run it will be too much of a shit storm to actually get the nomination to run for the presidency.
Sorry, but I'm not looking forward to a possible 8 fucking years of the White female corporatist appeasing equivalent of Obama.
We do not have enough information to come to a conclusion about this.
With that said, the fact that she was not brought up on charges by the victim or the state suggests that there was no malpractice.
My thoughts as well.
speculawyer
Member
There was this guy who defended some guys who shot and killed 5 people in Boston . . . known as the Boston Massacre. He became president. I guess he must have been pro-murder.
Only if you're a democrat.
- Status