Days After The Hearing, Abuse Specialist Makes A Vindicating Conclusion On Kavanaugh

Abuse specialist, Rachel Mitchell writes memo to Judiciary Committee on her analysis of Kavanaugh vs. Ford SCOTUS nomination hearing. Photo credit to US4Trump compilation with screen shots.Abuse specialist, Rachel Mitchell writes memo to Judiciary Committee on her analysis of Kavanaugh vs. Ford SCOTUS nomination hearing. Photo credit to US4Trump compilation with screen shots.

Well, well, well. Everybody recalls the woman whom the Republican’s secured to question Christine Blasey Ford on her explosive allegations about the abuse she experienced sometime in 1982…or there about?

The questioner’s name is Rachel Mitchell. And she is an Attorney, she is from Arizona and specializes in…you guessed it….sex crimes. (Official letter BELOW.)

Rachel’s perspective as an abuse specialist is worth listening to.

The Republican’s hired her because the Committee believed that questions coming from another woman who understands both the victim and perpetrator’s perspective would be easier on Ford.

After all, there is no question that Ford strongly believes she was sexually abused. Although she cannot recall how she got there, how she left or even where and when the event allegedly happened.

Ford was “100% certain” it was Kavanaugh.

Moreover,  Kavanaugh is also “100% certain” it was not him. Although he believes she was abused – it simply was not him who was involved in the event she described. (MORE BELOW.)

What does the abuse expert in the room think? See her statement to the Committee below.

The Washington Examiner reported Mitchell who summed it up in a nutshell. She said, “A ‘he said, she said’ case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that.”

Additionally, Mitchell noted per the Examiner, “Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them,” she said of Ford’s testimony”

I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard,” Mitchell said as reported by the Washington Examiner(Official letter BELOW.)

See letter from Mitchell to Congress on her assessment.

09-30-18 Mitchell Memo – Fo… by on Scribd

Leave a Reply