Questioning Tara Reade's story doesn't make one a rape apologist: On Joe Biden and #MeToo
Over almost three decades prosecuting criminals, I’ve been threatened, had a Santeria curse put on me, and been called a “fu--ing a--hole” on more occasions than I can count. But until my column for USA Today last week, “Why I’m skeptical about Reade’s sexual assault claim against Biden,” I’d never been called a “rape apologist.”
The murder, sexual assault, robbery and child pornography cases I dedicated my career to prosecuting have always put me firmly on the side of the victim. Protecting good people from bad ones was what motivated me to work for the Justice Department and decline the lucrative temptation of private practice. And placing my work for DOJ above my personal life was the never-ending argument that drove my partner of nine years to threaten to leave me.
So I was disturbed by the fallout emails, tweets and articles casting me as a perpetrator by the left for publicly airing apparent flaws in Tara Reade’s allegation of sexual assault against former Vice President Joe Biden. In order to be a “rape apologist,” I would have to believe a woman was raped, and then deny the assault — or offer an excuse on behalf of the man who assaulted her. I could never do either.
Most sexual assaults happen in private. Only the accused and the accuser know for certain if an assault occurred. But that does not stop people from convincing themselves that if they can see an assault in their mind’s eye, it’s as good as videotape evidence. It’s not. There are times when reasonable people can arrive at different conclusions, based on the available evidence.
-more-
https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-20200508-gbf3lyw6n5hhjhad36fm25p3oq-story.html
This is by the prosecutor who wrote the USA Today editorial. Too much to print here but I recommend reading the whole thing.
= new reply since forum marked as read
