Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 35
  1. #1 ‘Hillary Clinton Took Me Through Hell,’ Rape Victim Says 
    Power CUer
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    10,090
    The victim was 12 when she was raped. Hillary smeared this child in court to get her client off: then she boasted about it.


    ‘Hillary Clinton Took Me Through Hell,’ Rape Victim Says
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...ctim-says.html

    Hillary Clinton is known as a champion of women and girls, but one woman who says she was raped as a 12-year-old in Arkansas doesn’t think Hillary deserves that honor. This woman says Hillary smeared her and used dishonest tactics to successfully get her attacker off with a light sentence—even though, she claims, Clinton knew he was guilty.

    The victim in the 1975 sexual abuse case that became Clinton’s first criminal defense case as a 27-year-old lawyer has only spoken to the media once since her attack, a contested, short interaction with a reporter in 2008, during Clinton’s last presidential campaign run. Now 52, she wants to speak out after hearing Clinton talk about her case on newly discovered audio recordings from the 1980s, unearthed by the Washington Free Beacon and made public this week.

    In a long, emotional interview with The Daily Beast, she accused Clinton of intentionally lying about her in court documents, going to extraordinary lengths to discredit evidence of the rape, and later callously acknowledging and laughing about her attackers’ guilt on the recordings.

    “Hillary Clinton took me through Hell,” the victim said. The Daily Beast agreed to withhold her name out of concern for her privacy as a victim of sexual assault.....

    ...The victim’s allegation that Clinton smeared her following her rape is based on a May 1975 court affidavit written by Clinton on behalf of Thomas Alfred Taylor, one of the two alleged attackers, whom Clinton agreed to defend after being asked by the prosecutor. Taylor had specifically requested a female attorney.

    “I have been informed that the complainant is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and engage in fantasizing,” Clinton, then named Hillary D. Rodham, wrote in the affidavit. “I have also been informed that she has in the past made false accusations about persons, claiming they had attacked her body. Also that she exhibits an unusual stubbornness and temper when she does not get her way.”

    Clinton also wrote that a child psychologist told her that children in early adolescence “tend to exaggerate or romanticize sexual experiences,” especially when they come from “disorganized families, such as the complainant.”

    The victim vigorously denied Clinton’s accusations and said there has never been any explanation of what Clinton was referring to in that affidavit. She claims she never accused anyone of attacking her before her rape.

    “I’ve never said that about anyone. I don’t know why she said that. I have never made false allegations. I know she was lying,” she said. “I definitely didn’t see older men. I don’t know why Hillary put that in there and it makes me plumb mad.”....

    ...The victim’s second main grievance with Clinton stems from the newly revealed audio recordings, which were taped in a series of interviews of Clinton with Arkansas reporter Roy Reed, who was researching an article on the Clintons that was ultimately never published. The Free Beacon found the tapes archived at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville, amidst thousands of pieces of Clinton history that are being periodically released for public consumption.

    On the tapes, Clinton, who speaks in a Southern drawl, appears to acknowledge that she was aware of her client’s guilt, brags about successfully getting the only piece of physical evidence thrown out of court, and laughs about it all whimsically.

    “He took a lie detector test. I had him take a polygraph, which he passed, which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs,” Clinton says on the recording, failing to hold back some chuckles.

    She then describes how she discovered that investigators had cut out and lost a section of the suspect’s underwear that they said contained the victim’s blood. Clinton brought the remaining underwear segment to a Nobel Prize-winning blood expert in Brooklyn, NY, she explained, in order to convince him to lend his heavyweight reputation and influence to her defense case.

    “And so the, sort of the story through the grapevine was, if you get him interested in the case, then you know you had the foremost expert in the world willing to testify so that it came out the way you wanted it to come out,” Clinton said.

    Clinton told the judge that the famous expert was willing to testify. Instead of the original charge of first-degree rape, the prosecutors let Taylor plead to a lesser charge: unlawful fondling of a child. According to the Free Beacon, Taylor was sentenced to one year behind bars, with two months reduced for time served. The second attacker was never charged.

    “Oh, he plea bargained. Got him off with time served in the county jail, he’d been in the county jail about two months,” Clinton said on the recording, apparently not remembering the sentence accurately.

    For the victim, the tapes prove that while Clinton was arguing in the affidavit that the victim could have some culpability in her own attack, she actually believed that her client was guilty. Taylor’s light sentence was a miscarriage of justice, the victim said....
    Last edited by Elspeth; 06-23-2014 at 05:03 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Power CUer noonwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    12,773
    Somewhere in this case is a judge who let the guy off.


    Defense lawyers are defense lawyers. That's what they do, defend the accused. Even the guilty.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member wasp69's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    438
    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    Somewhere in this case is a judge who let the guy off.


    Defense lawyers are defense lawyers. That's what they do, defend the accused. Even the guilty.
    Any excuse, no matter how thin or twisted, to keep from tarnishing the democrat brand. Wow, Noonwitch, that is an impressive low, even for you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member DumbAss Tanker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    2,776
    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    Somewhere in this case is a judge who let the guy off.


    Defense lawyers are defense lawyers. That's what they do, defend the accused. Even the guilty.

    They're still not allowed to lie directly to the court, which is what that affidavit is if she did not have an independent, articulable factual basis in admissible evidence for everything she put in it...and the unsupported, self-serving, lying BS excuses of her client and his co-defendant are not considered to be that.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Administrator SaintLouieWoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Sarasota Florida
    Posts
    40,660
    Also don't forget that laugh on the tape. That reveals all you need to know about Hillary and her concern for other women. She wasn't too concerned for those women who made the accusations against Bill. She has always been a woman concerned only for herself and for the accumulation of power (her power).
    http://http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r231/SarasotaRepub/83069bcc.png

    " To the world you are just one more person, but to a rescued pet, you are the world."

    "
    A Nation of Sheep Breeds a Government of Wolves!"

    GO CARDS

    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Power CUer noonwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    12,773
    Quote Originally Posted by wasp69 View Post
    Any excuse, no matter how thin or twisted, to keep from tarnishing the democrat brand. Wow, Noonwitch, that is an impressive low, even for you.
    For what it's worth, I could never stoop as low as you do with your attempts to insult me. Your hatred for me is pretty intense, possibly even pathological, for a guy who doesn't actually know me in the real world.


    Other posters disagreed with me about this topic. Other posters don't stalk me throughout this site looking for reasons to make personal attacks on me when they disagree with me. Get some counseling.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Sin City Moderator RobJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    17,265
    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    For what it's worth, I could never stoop as low as you do with your attempts to insult me. Your hatred for me is pretty intense, possibly even pathological, for a guy who doesn't actually know me in the real world.


    Other posters disagreed with me about this topic. Other posters don't stalk me throughout this site looking for reasons to make personal attacks on me when they disagree with me. Get some counseling.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Posts
    911
    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    Somewhere in this case is a judge who let the guy off.


    Defense lawyers are defense lawyers. That's what they do, defend the accused. Even the guilty.
    Concur that the judge was worse than a horse's hindquarters. The dude or dudette is probably no longer disgracing the bench. I hope so, anyway.

    Defense attorneys do their jobs, even when they believe their clients guilty. I get that, and it's a reason I would not and could not be a criminal defense lawyer. The idea that my job would be to get a violent criminal off easy - such as in this case - appalls me! But taking being a defense attorney for what it is, Hillary went beyond getting a violent man back on the streets in just a year. She smeared a 12YO or 13YO girl in public; without the girl being able to fight back; verbally tortured a 12YO or 13YO girl for however many hours the girl was being questioned by Hillary; and then chuckled at the memory several years later.

    Maybe if you think a while about what Hillary did, maybe if you imagine yourself in that girl's shoes, you'll understand better the reaction of some folks here to your bland and dismissive comment, "That's what they do ...".
    Last edited by SVPete; 06-25-2014 at 03:15 PM. Reason: Completed a thought
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Sin City Moderator RobJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    17,265
    Quote Originally Posted by DumbAss Tanker View Post
    They're still not allowed to lie directly to the court, which is what that affidavit is if she did not have an independent, articulable factual basis in admissible evidence for everything she put in it...and the unsupported, self-serving, lying BS excuses of her client and his co-defendant are not considered to be that.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Sin City Moderator RobJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    17,265
    Quote Originally Posted by SVPete View Post
    Maybe if you think a while about what Hillary did, maybe if you imagine yourself in that girl's shoes, you'll understand better the reaction of some folks here to your bland and dismissive comment, "That's what they do ...".

    It almost sounds like child abuse to me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •