Join Victor Davis Hanson and cohost Sami Winc for the news of the week: Tucker joins Twitter, the verdict on Trump in the Carroll civil lawsuit, Biden’s election bid, the US border as Title 42 ends, and managing US debt.
Menu
As always, so brilliant, well thought out and well spoken.
Thank you, Victor Davis Hanson. You are a shining light in an increasingly dark world.
God bless and keep you. I hope CA keeps you.
You are spot-on, as VDH is always. Where would we be without the rare few like VDH who brilliantly and succinctly analyze the daily insanity of this govt? Just imagine having a President with his brains and logic.
It is true, the American people are tired of all the litigation and general chaos caused by Trumps detractors. But I also believe we are more tired of the people that make the litigation and chaos. I think, or HOPE rather that the latter is what will eventually win out.
It is my prayer that the later will win out. Thank you for your comment.
Another fascinating description, discussion.
Thank you.
Indoctrination works better than education. Your so-called bright illegal alien flag burning student is a good example.
On the flip side, affirmation is the antidote. Repeat after me, “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United State of America…”
Education is overrated when it comes to influencing human emotions and their actions.
Phil,
Well said.
Trump’s recent civil lawsuit with E. Jean Carroll was not only a travesty of justice in and of itself, but the legal means by which it was allowed to move forward could create many more injustices in the future.
Basically, Trump was convicted of sexual assault that was alleged to have taken place nearly 30 years ago. And instead of going to criminal court to test Carroll’s theory that he raped her in a department store this case was adjudicated in a civil court without any physical evidence and strong circumstantial evidence to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
At the heart of the issue is the Adult Survivors Act that was passed into law recently by the New York legislature It allows civil tolls that had expired to be restarted for a period of one year. This law is nothing short of a direct assault on the due process rights that separate us from a police state.
Statutes of limitations protect the innocent from having to defend themselves from stale accusations which could easily lead to a miscarriage of justice our system was designed to prevent. They also provide an important function of safeguarding the accused’s right to a fair and speedy trial. Memories can fade over time, witnesses can die, and evidence can get lost or destroyed, so to allow weak cases such as E. Jean Carroll’s to have a second bite at the apple decades after the statute of limitations have run out only stacks the deck against the accused.
If we want to see what can happen when…
…victims must be believed and the scales of justice are tipped in an accuser’s favor then look no further than the UK where there are no statutes of limitations and due process safeguards have been watered down or eliminated. The late barrister Barbara Hewson has written in detail about the effects these changes have brought to the British legal system. Here are some of her findings:
(1) Under British law an accuser can choose to remain anonymous throughout a legal proceeding while the accused enjoys no such privilege. Special exceptions had been made for children testifying in sexual abuse cases, but it was never intended to cover adults.
(2) In the early 1990’s the House of Lords eliminated an important evidentiary rule called “striking similarity.” This rule said that cases from multiple accusers couldn’t be bundled together unless they shared a striking similarity. Hewson defined this as a “rapist who wore a Batman costume.” Hewson argues that when flimsy cases are tried together and multiple accusers are allowed to testify behind a silhouetted screen that the presumption of innocence is all but obliterated.
(3) Providing the actual dates in which the sexual assault took place is no longer required (cf. Donald Trump’s case). In any other criminal or civil proceedings if the defendant or plaintiff can’t provide this basic information the case would be thrown out.
And what is the collective effect of these three changes? Imagine getting a knock on the door from…
…the police. They inform you that an anonymous person has claimed that between April of 1971 and September of 1973 you repeatedly groped and fondled them. How would you defend yourself in court?
As Barbara Hewson has said, “an accusation is not its own proof” and “an historical sexual assault accusation is easy to make but nearly impossible to refute.”
I think the far left would like very much to emulate what has taken place in the UK. And that starts by dismantling due process safeguards such as statute of limitations.
N.B.: May I recommend googling Dr. Stephen Glascoe, Liam Allan, Simon Warr and any essay written by the late Barbara Hewson.
That was really thorough! Thank you for providing sources to follow up with as well. This kind of post really enriches the community.
Ron – Thanks for reporting on these matters.