This is gonna be an unpopular opinion, buy I don't believe in hiding accusers. I don't care how vile the defendant, you have every right to publicly face your accuser. This is how evil shit takes root. This is how convictions were obtained during the bolshevic revolution. Its gulag archipelago technique and it needs to stop. Why? Because the logical extension is to convict based on anonymous testimony that cannot be cross examined "for public safety". Further, if you don't know your accuser (i.e., fake crimes alleged), you can't adequately prep a defense. This could also eventually serve as grounds for "deprivation of rights" and get her let go scott free. We've seen many times how lefty judges on appeal can suddenly find the rights of the accused to have been violated when its one of their own. She is highly connected intelligence. Does anyone teally think the enemy aren't above fucking up the conviction intentionally so that she can get off scott free without singing? Its was this same argument that was used in part to get Cosby off.
Agreed completely. A trial is an adversarial procedure - the accused faces the accuser unless there is such an overwhelming presumption of harm to the accuser that it negates the rights of the defendent, an incredibly high hurdle, that I don't think is met here.
The accusers (who I believe) were teenagers when the offences happened, and are adults now. They can testify, even if it is emotionally painfull. This is not dealing with "children" either now or then. The victims are not 7, 8, 9 or 10 who have to testify. They are adults who want justice - something I think we all want.
Do it right. Put her (Maxwell) and all who participated in jail (or more), but do it properly so they can't evade it by a technicality.
I agree with 'face your accuser' but I wonder if this is more about protecting the lives of the accusers - this testimony could implicate some very wealthy and connected individuals, who are operating outside of the law. Eliminating victims/witnesses via 'accident' isn't out of the realm. And it's a threat these people would suffer their entire lives, not just for the duration of the trial. Not sure how to counter that and satisfy both needs
This is gonna be an unpopular opinion, buy I don't believe in hiding accusers. I don't care how vile the defendant, you have every right to publicly face your accuser. This is how evil shit takes root. This is how convictions were obtained during the bolshevic revolution. Its gulag archipelago technique and it needs to stop. Why? Because the logical extension is to convict based on anonymous testimony that cannot be cross examined "for public safety". Further, if you don't know your accuser (i.e., fake crimes alleged), you can't adequately prep a defense. This could also eventually serve as grounds for "deprivation of rights" and get her let go scott free. We've seen many times how lefty judges on appeal can suddenly find the rights of the accused to have been violated when its one of their own. She is highly connected intelligence. Does anyone teally think the enemy aren't above fucking up the conviction intentionally so that she can get off scott free without singing? Its was this same argument that was used in part to get Cosby off.
Agreed completely. A trial is an adversarial procedure - the accused faces the accuser unless there is such an overwhelming presumption of harm to the accuser that it negates the rights of the defendent, an incredibly high hurdle, that I don't think is met here.
The accusers (who I believe) were teenagers when the offences happened, and are adults now. They can testify, even if it is emotionally painfull. This is not dealing with "children" either now or then. The victims are not 7, 8, 9 or 10 who have to testify. They are adults who want justice - something I think we all want.
Do it right. Put her (Maxwell) and all who participated in jail (or more), but do it properly so they can't evade it by a technicality.
MAGA
WWG!WGA
I agree with 'face your accuser' but I wonder if this is more about protecting the lives of the accusers - this testimony could implicate some very wealthy and connected individuals, who are operating outside of the law. Eliminating victims/witnesses via 'accident' isn't out of the realm. And it's a threat these people would suffer their entire lives, not just for the duration of the trial. Not sure how to counter that and satisfy both needs