General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAchilleaze
(15,543 posts)major debacle
(508 posts)This is a very strong body blow
DownriverDem
(6,228 posts)That is not a deposition. A deposition is where attorneys on both sides question the witness who is under oath. A court reporter is there to take down every word. As the title of the document states it's a Declaration.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)manor321
(3,344 posts)Those are blockbuster allegations.
Thank you to this woman for being so brave!
spanone
(135,832 posts)Renew Deal
(81,859 posts)blaze
(6,361 posts)and I can't figure out how to cut and paste it.
She says that she was a victim of gang rape and Kavanaugh and Judge were both involved.
Renew Deal
(81,859 posts)blaze
(6,361 posts)honest.abe
(8,678 posts)I dont see how Kavajerk survives this.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)She was once Judge's girlfriend.
honest.abe
(8,678 posts)Its all coming together to paint a very strong case against this asshole.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Gang rapes? We know it happens. But again and again the same social circles? Did no one ever call the police or tell parents or school authorities? The behavior just kept going party after party?
Not my scene. I left school early to go to work, got an adult boyfriend, went to parties with many adults I knew and didn't, quite a wide variety from many backgrounds, lots of drugs and alcohol, some talk here and there about committing terrorist acts to bring on the revolution (it was the '60s). I thought that was pretty wild, but it was Sesame Street compared to what's described here.
honest.abe
(8,678 posts)Afraid of being labeled tattle tale or not cool or whatever... these are kids. These girls probably thought this was normal behavior at parties like this.
MountCleaners
(1,148 posts)I attended many drunken parties in high school. No way would we tell any adults. We'd all get blamed and there would be no more parties.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)These girls would never have thought being drugged and raped by multiple males was normal behavior. At parties like this or anywhere else.
But we know these things do happen. This would have required an ongoing supply of girls who didn't really know each other. Other witnesses did comment that students came from various schools.
But again, don't just swallow everything whole. 100% for this:
honest.abe
(8,678 posts)I think they just saw it and just keep on partying as long as it didnt affect them directly.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Adolescence is a bundle of dysfunctions.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)This is sickening.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)For each other and to only drink from cans and bottles we opened ourselves. Every party they tried again and again to separate us from the pack, and to serve us punch.
I was 14-15 and mostly there for the free booze. It was totally normal. Wed never go upstairs or down when asked.
Cha
(297,232 posts)Link to tweet
I just looked at the thread and there's a "correction".. Ralph Blasey is a Jr not a IV.
LisaM
(27,811 posts)Good grief.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)Julie is a strong woman. She will finally get some justice.
calimary
(81,267 posts)O.M.G.
O.M.G.
O.M.G.
O.M.G.
O.M.G
O.M.G.
Frustratedlady
(16,254 posts)Avenatti won't let them sweep this under the rug and it darned well better not be swept away.
I predict the following:
Kavanaugh's confirmation is pulled for SCOTUS
Kavanaugh's present job is no longer available - "You're Fired!"
Kavanaugh's wife finally gets up enough nerve to kiss him goodbye
Kavanaugh's daughters divorce him right along with their mom
Ms. Toad
(34,072 posts)Can't happen. He's a federal judge with a lifetime appointment.
Frustratedlady
(16,254 posts)No one can be guaranteed a lifetime job with no chance of losing it. Impeachment might be overkill, but there has to be something similar.
Ms. Toad
(34,072 posts)It is the only means to remove a federal judge.
(So Trump can't say, "you're fired." Congress has to impeach him.)
Recursion
(56,582 posts)She's saying exactly as much as she can firmly remember and no more. It's still damning.
DownriverDem
(6,228 posts)copy image.
mainer
(12,022 posts)And to think some of us doubted him.
gabeana
(3,166 posts)Here on DU
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)I like Charles Pierces perceptions, that Avenatti is an excellent ambulance chaser, a damn good one, and that hes been right every time so far, and that yes hes got a mega-ego but that hes using it for good.
I guess the overkill on the skepticism gets annoying.
watoos
(7,142 posts)by right wing Republicans. Not nice to see that narrative reposted here on DU.
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,446 posts)English
Etymology
The origins of this phrase date from 1897, from newspaper articles about attorneys seeking clients through targeted mail solicitation. Ambulance chasing was one of the descriptive phrases employed by the media for this activity. It later became a derogatory term for direct advertising.
winstars
(4,220 posts)watoos
(7,142 posts)It was meant to take down Avenatti. Funny how it arose right after his decision to maybe run for president.
winstars
(4,220 posts)BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)Im gonna have to go find the link but Im in the middle of work (brief pause in the assignment right now).
lunatica
(53,410 posts)Stormy is a sex worker so many, including people here, judge her but Avenatti doesnt and he is bringing Donald Trump down.
As far as I know hes the only male lawyer who believes women deserve the best legal representation there is. So now women who normally would have little recourse to fight important men who have sexually assaulted them are going to him because he fights his ass off for them.
Maybe if the women who came forward during the Presidential campaign to accuse Trump of groping them had gone to Avenatti things might be very different for them today. I have respect for Gloria Allred but Avenatti goes much further and makes sure his clients arent forgotten or left in the dust.
And so far, when he says something important is coming he has produced.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)I loved when he released the recent statement. Brave womanI feel glad shes got a good lawyer. May he bury the perps.
calimary
(81,267 posts)AND one other thing that Charlie Pierce DOES point out - twice, in that essay: Michael Avenatti hasn't been wrong yet.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)I just found Pierces essay very interesting.
Oh I want to see Avenatti bury these scumbags. Hes the only voice talking in the language theyre scared enough of: I can crush you without cheating
calimary
(81,267 posts)And he COULD crush them without cheating. I'm convinced of that.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)I cant stand pukes getting away with their shit all the time.
Duppers
(28,120 posts)"The doubting of him" among many other things.
OliverQ
(3,363 posts)These allegations just make Republicans want to confirm him even more.
justie18
(169 posts)I was one of the doubters and I must say he delivered - bigly!
RockaFowler
(7,429 posts)His lies are catching up with him. That Faux News interview was one of the worst things he could have done.
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)I knew he was a smarmy dirtball all along!
honest.abe
(8,678 posts)One of the Dems on the panel needs to read this during their time of questioning.
Achilleaze
(15,543 posts)Nothing less will do.
leftstreet
(36,108 posts)DURec
jezebel321
(278 posts)Jersey Devil
(9,874 posts)lol
klook
(12,155 posts)Ugh.
trc
(823 posts)He had "Beach Week" clearly written on his calendar. Now when he claims he was at beach week this document ties him to aggressive sexual activity there as well. He is now trapped in his own lies: did he commit this sexual assault or that sexual assault, or, more likely, both. This sort of behavior seemed to be so prevalent that he has no alibi because there appears to be no period when this was not going on.
BootinUp
(47,147 posts)His calendar.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)ProudMNDemocrat
(16,785 posts)If one has not gone through therapy of any kind to address such behaviors. The attitudes remain throughout the years.
It makes me wonder how much control he has over his own wife and daughters. Did anyone notice the look on Mrs. Kavanaugh's face as she looked in subservient obedience at him during his FOX interview? He answered some questions for her, rather than hear her own words. THAT is what I mean about CONTROL.
Must be all the Psychology I took in college to notice that pattern of behavior. Not to mention all the years of Catholic guilt.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)This really is breaking, Brooklynite. My first search screen on her name had two entries for this, your post and CNBC's posted 5 minutes before, headline without story yet:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/26/michael-avenatti-identifies-kavanaugh-accuser-as-julie-swetnick.html
Adendum: Tweets popping up. Here's one from Avenotti.
Link to tweet
reACTIONary
(5,770 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Link to tweet
Btw, holding off belief while investigative journalists gather information to assess the credibility of all this information is what sensible people who are hard to fool do.
For me, enough evidence on Brett Cavanaugh is already in, and opposing his confirmation does not require any leaps of faith at all. He's very unfit for a variety of reasons.
reACTIONary
(5,770 posts)... investigate reporter stage and now require a full up FBI investigation. (As if we didn't from the get go.)
As far as veting goes, an experienced lawyer isn't going to take an acusation like this at face value without doing some independent checking. That might be less objective than a independent investigative journalist, but it gives some credibility above and beyond the "tipster" level.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)with real hope that responsible reporting will force FBI investigation.
Blind leaps of faith after every new allegation are just completely unnecessary, and if we keep them up, inevitably there are going to be some unpleasant landings. And we're not even being promised an afterlife in return.
Have an enjoyable day.
Old Vet
(2,001 posts)Hope they bury this motherfucker...Remember GARLAND..
triron
(22,003 posts)So is she filing a criminal complaint?
durablend
(7,460 posts)If so, expect the entire thing to end up in the trash
demmiblue
(36,851 posts)calimary
(81,267 posts)Items 11, 12, 13, and 14.
BOOM, BOOM, BOOM, AND BOOM.
DesertRat
(27,995 posts)Mark Judge must be questioned.
ProudProgressiveNow
(6,129 posts)mia
(8,360 posts)brooklynite
(94,571 posts)PA Democrat
(13,225 posts)lostnfound
(16,179 posts)Very careful and precise which makes it all the more credible
It may be that he had a mechanical failure of some sort or didnt wa t to carry it out himself for whatever reason doesnt remove his guilt whatsoever
reACTIONary
(5,770 posts)From the account she was incapacitated to the point that she would not be able to identify any one particular assalient defimitivly. But this is more than enough for conviction in the court of piblic opinion.
forgotmylogin
(7,528 posts)A: she knew girls were being drugged and gang-raped over multiple parties, and that Judge and Kavanaugh were involved
B: she was drugged and gang-raped at a party where Judge and Kavanaugh were "present" I'm not sure if by "present" she means "at the party" or "present in the room during her assault."
C: It stands to reason if J&K were in line to take a turn at other parties that they wouldn't pass up an opportunity when she was the victim, so "present" pretty much implicates them.
D: If Rs want to say "well, how can she know if Kavanaugh was one of her attackers if she was drugged out?" basically shoots themselves in the foot. It's bad enough that she experienced this, and witnessed Kavanaugh as a perpetrator on multiple occasions.
I like judicial nominees who aren't alleged rapists.
reACTIONary
(5,770 posts)LOL, Right On!
democratisphere
(17,235 posts)vlyons
(10,252 posts)democratisphere
(17,235 posts)NewJeffCT
(56,828 posts)corroborates what Ramirez had said, if I'm not mistaken?
uponit7771
(90,339 posts)Hav
(5,969 posts)but pretty close to it. All stories, independent of each other, reveal pretty much the same depiction of his rotten character and the way he used to behave. It just gets worse every day with him.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)He told her of one gang rape that he was involved in, claimed to her that it was consensual. Nothing is consensual when one of the partners are whacked out of Their skull by Booz or drugs.
llmart
(15,539 posts)Both Kavanaugh and Judge need to be in jail. Judge is a coward trying to hide from all this thinking it will all "blow over". If he was any sort of man, he'd come forward and admit what he did and what Kavanaugh did.
FloridaBlues
(4,008 posts)brush
(53,778 posts)declaration point by point. There was nothing left vague or unclear. Kavanaugh was said to have engaged in drunken sexual assault at house parties, spiked the punch at parties and target girls to get intoxicated, and participated in train rapes.
Melvin also just said that Grassley has released a statement saying he has received the declaration and is reviewing it.
Looks like it's curtains for Kavanaugh, which has a nice ring to it.
Curtains for Kavanaugh.
KPN
(15,645 posts)Nothing to stop the torches and pitchforks from coming out when all seems lost anyway.
TheBlackAdder
(28,201 posts)brooklynite
(94,571 posts)Last edited Wed Sep 26, 2018, 11:57 AM - Edit history (1)
DECLARATION OF JULIE SWETNICK
I, JULIE SWETNTCK, declare as follows:
I. My name is Julie Swetnick and I am a resident of Washington, D.C. I fully understand the seriousness of the statements contained within this declaration. I have personal knowledge of the information stated herein and if called to testify to the same would and could do so.
2. I am a graduate of Gaithersburg High School in Gaithersburg, MD.
3. 1 presently hold the following active clearances associated · with working within the federal government: Public Trust - U.S. Department of Treasury (DOT), U.S. Mint (USM), Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
4. I have also previously held the following inactive clearances: Secret - U.S. Department of State (DOS), U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and Public Trust - U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
5. My prior employment includes working with (a) Vietnam War Commemoration (VWC), Joint Services Providers (JSP), U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) in Arlington, Virginia; (b) U.S. Mint, U.S. Department of Treasury; (c) U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS), U.S. Department of Treasury; (d) Government Affairs and Communications Department, D.C. Department of General Services (DGS), Government of the District of Columbia (DC.Gov); (e) Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Department of Homeland Security; and (d) the U.S. Department of State (DOS). I was also one of the first 100 women in the world to achieve a Microsoft Certified Systems Engineering Certification (MCSE).
6. I first met Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh in approximately 1980-1981. I was introduced to them at a house party that I attended in the Washington, D.C. area. I observed Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh as extremely close friends during the early 1980s when I knew them and interacted with them. I would describe them as "joined at the hip" and I consistently saw them together in many social settings. There is no question in my mind that Mark Judge has significant information concerning the conduct of Brett Kavanaugh during the 1980s, especially as it relates to his actions toward women.
7. Following that first introduction, I attended well over ten house parties in the Washington, D.C. area during the years 1981-1983 where Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh were present. These parties were a common occurrence in the area and occurred nearly every weekend during the school year. On numerous occasions at these parties, I witnessed Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh drink excessively and engage in highly inappropriate conduct, including being overly aggressive with girls and not taking "No" for an answer. This conduct included the fondling and grabbing of girls without their consent.
8. I observed Brett Kavanaugh drink excessively at many of these parties and engage in abusive and physically aggressive behavior toward girls, including pressing girls against him without their consent, "grinding" against girls, and attempting to remove or shift girls' clothing to expose private body parts. I likewise observed him be verbally abusive towards girls by making crude sexual comments to them that were designed to demean, humiliate and embarrass them. I often witnessed Brett Kavanaugh speak in a demeaning manner about girls in general as well as specific girls by name. I also witnessed Brett Kavanaugh behave as a "mean drunk" on many occasions at these parties.
9. I have been told by other women that this conduct also occurred during the Summer months in Ocean City, Maryland on numerous occasions. I also witnessed such conduct on one occasion in Ocean City, Maryland during "Beach Week."
10. I have reviewed Brett Kavanaugh's recent claim on Fox News regarding his alleged "innocence" during his high school years and lack of sexual activity. This is absolutely false and a lie. I witnessed Brett Kavanaugh consistently engage in excessive drinking and inappropriate contact of a sexual nature with women during the early 1980s.
11. During the years 1981-82, I became aware of efforts by Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh and others to "spike" the "punch" at house parties I attended with drugs and/or grain alcohol so as to cause girls to lose their inhibitions and their ability to say "No." This caused me to make an effort to purposely avoid the "punch" at these parties. I witnessed efforts by Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh and others to "target" particular girls so they could be taken advantage of; it was usually a girl that was especially vulnerable because she was alone at the party or shy.
12. I also witnessed efforts by Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh and others to cause girls to become inebriated and disoriented so they could then be "gang raped" in a side room or bedroom by a train" of numerous boys. I have a firm recollection of seeing 11 boys lined up outside rooms at many of these parties waiting for their "turn" with a girl inside the room. These boys included Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh.
13. In approximately 1982, I became the victim of one of these "gang" or "train" rapes where Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh were present. Shortly after the incident, I shared what had transpired with at least two other people. During the incident, I was incapacitated without my consent and unable to fight off the boys raping me. I believe I was drugged using Quaaludes or something similar placed in what I was drinking.
14. I am aware of other witnesses that can attest to the truthfulness of each of the statements above.
I declare, under penalty of perjury and under the laws of the United States of America, that the foregoing is true and correct. I have executed this declaration on 22 September 25, 2018.
(signed)
Julie Swetnick
olegramps
(8,200 posts)major debacle
(508 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)and in vile sex comments. Both fine.
News outlets have to examine this before running. Avenotti and Ms. Swetnick aren't exactly as precise as the other claimants. These are big, wide-ranging claims. She saw guys lined up in a train at party after party? Didn't they run through the stock of available victims at some point? Didn't girls leave or run to call their dads in a panic when these guys showed up?
Maybe every word is basically true, but caution is obviously advised. If she saw all this over time, dozens of students from various schools should have also.
Otoh, as this points out:
Link to tweet
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)gordianot
(15,238 posts)AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)Lists no legal entity she was under oath to...for there to be a threat of perjury.
It appears this is her declaration to Avenatti, or his secretary maybe.
I don't see this triggering an F.B.I intervention as it's still a she said he said matter.
I don't see MSNBC or CNN even running with Avenatti's tweet.
Anyone can make a Declaration.....I'm begging for caution here.
honest.abe
(8,678 posts)This is huge dude!
triron
(22,003 posts)AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)My point stands.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts), alleging Schindler's "sketchy, Weiner-like stuff", or the pretense that Kavanugh's gambling debts are equivalent to Pres. Clinton's legal bills.
Sketchy. Shifty. But soon, righteously rationalized.
The narrative of a 'bean-can" indeed.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)I NEVER have made any such allegation.
My comments on "information" were with regards to his Judicial decisions ONLY.
You can't substantiate your false claim as to what I said.
Gambling debts....still an unproven claim made in that thread.
Grasswire2
(13,569 posts)AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)I'm in NO way judging her veracity...ONLY that this is a Declaration to her lawyer...NOT a deposition under oath.
grantcart
(53,061 posts)If this happened with so many people there should be more witnesses.
Understand the has them.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)You see what you want to see...I see more blood in the water, as do almost everyone at DU. Almost everyone!
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)Has Avenatti submitted this to the F.B.I or the Marland LEO's or just tweet blasted it?
I don't just swallow everthing Avenatti tweets.
Sorry I just don't.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)a small detail right!!
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)That really is a huge mistake invalidating all the claims!
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)It's a declaration....not a sworn affidavit.
I am NOT questioning her veracity as i said above.
There's no Notary stamp on it, no witness signature on it, and intentionally so.
Has it been submitted to ANY Law enforcement agency as a sworn statement?
Avenatti didn't say so when he called into MSNBC.
She should be ready to be called to testify under oath to the Judiciary cmt.
That's when it will become "sworn" to.
Stallion
(6,474 posts)she can be charged with perjury for any material false statements
When I file in state court I file an Affidavit-when I file in Federal Court I file a Declaration without the necessity of a Notary Public
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1746
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)She will not be charged with perjury making a Declaration to her LAWYER if they aren't true. As far as I can find...that's all we have so far.
If Avenatti submits that to the Judiciary Cmt...and her declarations are found to be untruthful...whole different ballgame.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Because at that point we come to 18 USC 1001 and just what is the status of a volunteer submission not requested or required by the committee.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)Does a tweet with pics of a Declaration count?
Did he submit the Declaration to the Committee?
Maybe I missed a report of him offering it officially.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)I always assume there might be something I missed as well, but, yes, if it is just a "declaration into the void", then the perjury invocation is just a way of saying "I'm serious." One could do a press release, an open letter, etc., but the implication here is that she would so testify if actually under a duty of truthfulness.
Like I said, we don't have a formal way to make oathlike public declarations. Of course, if we did, then things would certainly get entertaining.
ET Awful
(24,753 posts)There is no requirement that the notarization be on the signature page of the document, sometimes it's a completely separate page. The notary is simply applying their seal that they saw the person sign the document and verified that persons identity by following certain criteria.
A notarized document where the signer states they are making the statements under penalty of perjury would be admissible in court and the person would be subject to charges of perjury should the statements be found to be intentionally false.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)below the persons signature line.
ET Awful
(24,753 posts)When a document requires a formal acknowledgement of a signers intention to sign, the New York notary acknowledgement form must be included or attached to it. The purpose of the acknowledgement is for a notary public to verify the signers identity and their willingness to sign the document. If the notary is satisfied with the signers testimony, they will fill out the notary acknowledgement form, thus providing their official notarization. For a notary acknowledgement, the signer does not need to sign their document in front of a notary public in order for notarization be obtained. Furthermore, in New York, the notary public is not required to provide a seal or stamp, as long as they do supply their signature, the name of their licensing county, and their commission expiry date.
Laws §309, §137
Notary Public License Law - https://www.dos.ny.gov/licensing/lawbooks/notary.pdf
Technically, under New York law, you don't even need the seal, and the notary acknowledgment can be on a separate page.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)The only thing a notary does is to attest that the person signing is that person.
It doesn't add any more "oomph" to an invocation of the penalty of perjury to a document which is not actually required by law or regulation, or submitted as evidence in a legal proceeding.
ET Awful
(24,753 posts)Perhaps it would better if I'd said that it would be more easily admissible in court were the signer not personally present to testify that they signed it.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)The point is this is ONLY a Declaration to Avenatti, where there is no threat of a perjury issue.
I hope it's true that he forwarded it to the Committee so All the lawyers(from both sides) can parse it.
ET Awful
(24,753 posts)made the statements under penalty of perjury are sufficient. Under Federal law, the following would apply, and every state I've worked in has similar laws:
28 U.S. Code § 1746 - Unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury
US Code
Notes
Authorities (CFR)
prev | next
Wherever, under any law of the United States or under any rule, regulation, order, or requirement made pursuant to law, any matter is required or permitted to be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the sworn declaration, verification, certificate, statement, oath, or affidavit, in writing of the person making the same (other than a deposition, or an oath of office, or an oath required to be taken before a specified official other than a notary public), such matter may, with like force and effect, be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the unsworn declaration, certificate, verification, or statement, in writing of such person which is subscribed by him, as true under penalty of perjury, and dated, in substantially the following form:
(1) If executed without the United States: I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date).
(Signature).
(2) If executed within the United States, its territories, possessions, or commonwealths: I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date).
(Signature).
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)ET Awful
(24,753 posts)Any statement made where a person signs a document saying they are making the statement under penalty of perjury carries the legal weight as if they made the statement in court under oath and carries the same penalties should the statements be made falsely.
You can sit her and try to play concerned party all you like, but a statement made under penalty of perjury can result in charges of perjury if the statement is known to be false when made.
Want to know how I know this? The cases in which I've encountered such problems are from many years ago, but I've had many opposing parties sanctioned for making false statements in declarations in exactly the same format as this.
This declaration is a very standard format and is used literally thousands up on thousands of times every day.
You attempting to say "well it's not currently in a court of law" doesn't remove the weight of the statement being made under penalty of perjury. Once made, that statement can be presented in any legal proceeding and carries the same weight as if made under oath in that proceeding.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)While, again, I don't doubt the veracity of this declaration, your point here is not relevant:
"I've had many opposing parties sanctioned..."
Yes indeed. In proceedings where those statements were of record, and in a court which had the jurisdiction to do so.
If we had an open-ended perjury mechanism, then people would insist on it all of the time. Why not make every politician do it verbally each time they give a speech?
Because absent an actual proceeding in which the statement is relevant, merely going about in public saying "...and I say this under penalty of perjury" is of no consequence whatsoever. If I say to you, right now, "I declare under penalty of perjury that the sky is green and the grass is blue" S/JBERRYHILL/, then, as they say in Ghostbusters, "Who ya gonna call?" There is no free range fraud squad where you ring them up and say, "I'd like to report a perjury!" and they send out the team to make an arrest.
That's the whole point of the "proceeding" qualifier in the statute elsewhere in this thread. It is not a crime for me to lie to you, even if I say I'm doing it under oath. It IS a crime to lie to a tribunal - whether judicial, administrative or legislative - under oath or affirmation under penalty of perjury. I simply cannot, as between private parties (and absent some form of fraud) create a duty under perjury out of thin air.
ET Awful
(24,753 posts)The declarations were not part of a proceeding at the time. They became part of a proceeding later and they were deemed admissible and the parties were sanctioned for perjury.
I'm going to presume you haven't handled many real legal proceedings.
For instance, if there is no current legal action, and in the interest of preserving witness testimony, a witness signs a statement under penalty of perjury that they saw xxx do yyy to zzzz, that statement IS admissible in the future and can result in a charge of perjury if the statement is false.
You are attempting to make statements based on . . . well nothing really.
You are trying to come up with some kind if ridiculous argument why a declaration by an individual and made under penalty of perjury is somehow an imperfect declaration and is not held to the same standard as any other legally binding statement. That is inaccurate and demonstrably so.
Clearest example I can give? Prior to any action being initiated, a clerk for an opposing attorney executed a statement under penalty of perjury that they had personally delivered documents to x, y and z. Eighteen months later, this was found to be untrue. This resulted in sanctions, and ultimately the loss of the case due to the perjurious statement since no proof existed other than this statement that the documents in question had been delivered.
You can keep making your arguments all you like, I'll go by actual experience in the legal field in multiple state and federal cases up to and including cases presented to the USSC.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)That's an incorrect assumption.
"The declarations were not part of a proceeding at the time. They became part of a proceeding later..."
Identify the proceeding relevant to this declaration.
"in multiple state and federal cases up to and including cases presented to the USSC..."
...and you will continue to miss the point that this document is not submitted in any proceeding.
Furthermore, you seem to have completely missed where I specifically mentioned fraud, which is relevant to the circumstance which you seem to believe applies to any and all statements generally.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Prior to any action being initiated, a clerk for an opposing attorney executed a statement under penalty of perjury that they had personally delivered documents to x, y and z. Eighteen months later, this was found to be untrue. This resulted in sanctions, and ultimately the loss of the case due to the perjurious statement since no proof existed other than this statement that the documents in question had been delivered.
While you leave out a lot of detail about how this statement came into evidence, it sounds as if you are saying that the other side was relying on this statement in litigation as proof that it was delivered. That is, they had introduced the statement as evidence of delivery, correct?
There is no lawsuit here. Nobody is relying on this statement as evidence in a suit of anything.
ET Awful
(24,753 posts)In the example I gave, as with the current situation, there was no action at the time the declaration was made.
This did NOT decrease the value or impact of the declaration. Keep reaching.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)There is a certain kind of mindset which is so convinced it is correct that it cannot fathom that someone might disagree, and hence must resort to accusations of bad faith.
I'm sorry you feel the need to make personal accusations on the basis of a simple and quite inconsequential disagreement.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)You are correct with that statement......BUT that doesn't mean it has legal weight.
If Avenatti want's it to become a LEA issue...file it in the jurisdiction that can prosecute. With the F.B.I. They won't touch it as it's not Federal but it would show a resolve...belief in the allegation.
Political impact....sure. It will make Anti-Kavs more anti...will make Pro-Kavs more pro....other than that...squat.
Avenatti's tweet isn't going to move the middle..not that it matters.
This is a Senate issue at this point.
brush
(53,778 posts)under penalty of perjury. Avenatti was on the phone describing that he disclosed this days ago to Grassley with no response on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday so he had to reveal it today so that it wasn't completely ignored by the repugs.
Avenatti comes through again, despite all the DU naysayers put downs or him.
yodermon
(6,143 posts)no judge need be present.
This could be construed as Avenatti deposing his own client under oath, no?
Stallion
(6,474 posts)this is clearly a valid declaration with the same force as an Affidavit
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1746
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)You are ignoring the entire premise of that statute - "Wherever, under any law of the United States or under any rule, regulation, order, or requirement made pursuant to law, any matter is required or permitted to be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the sworn declaration, verification, certificate, statement, oath, or affidavit..."
The point of that statute is that anything which is REQUIRED or PERMITTED in a legal proceeding or pursuant to some statutory or regulatory requirement, to be supported by an oath or affidavit, can be done by a declaration expressly stating it is made under the penalty of perjury.
This is a statement that is not being made in any court proceeding or pursuant to any law, rule or regulation.
I don't doubt the veracity of the statement at all, but there is no particular entity which would have standing to prosecute a perjury charge here.
That said, do people use statements like this for various reasons all of the time? Yep, they do. I use statements of this form in ADR proceedings where there really is no practical way that it would ever be an issue. At the end of the day, it is more of a precatory thing, because people will in general respect the "formality" of signing something for a lawyer which contains such a statement. But if push comes to shove, there is no real consequence to it.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)That is not an insignificant nit...
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)However, at the end of the day, it's sort of like "cross my heart, hope to die, stick a needle in my eye." It adds something to the statement to the effect of "I'm really serious about this."
A better formulation would have been to send it to the committee and expressly reference 18 USC 1001. But, even there.....
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. If the matter relates to an offense under chapter 109A, 109B, 110, or 117, or section 1591, then the term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be not more than 8 years.
(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial proceeding, or that partys counsel, for statements, representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding.
(c) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only to
(1) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a matter related to the procurement of property or services, personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative branch; or
(2) any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.
...the question would be whether a judicial nomination committee hearing was an "investigation or review" within the meaning of (c)(2).
Which brings me back to the point that, outside of the confines of a particular proceeding, there really is no good mechanism for someone to swear something is true with any real practical impact. So, you do what you can.
H2O Man
(73,537 posts)Intense.
fleur-de-lisa
(14,624 posts)Freethinker65
(10,021 posts)That Kavanaugh gang raped in high school and was nominated for the SCOTUS and the nomination rushed was a bit too much to believe.
This, along with his pal Judge and yearbook bragging, appears to confirm that Kavanaugh did more than mow lawns and go to church in his spare time while attending Georgetown Prep. At the least, Brett hung around with some pretty deplorable classmates and did nothing but get drunk when he found himself in situations where female students were being taken advantage of. At worst, he observed and/or participated. It does not appear she is accusing Kavanaugh of raping her, just that he was at the party and knew what was going on.
Rather than admitting under oath that along with being a student athlete he attended some rather wild teenage parties in his youth, he chose to portray himself as someone else. The outright lying to get the job of Supreme Court Justice disqualifies him.
And, when this is over, the GOP and McConnell OWN this bastard. They were willing to destroy rules and decorum of the Senate to rush this man's nomination through. Certainly they could have insisted Trump find a conservative Federalist Society anti-abortion, anti-labor, pro-corporation qualified nominee to support that did not have to lie to try to get approved. At the least, they could have voted Kavanaugh down in committee.
The GOP is now the party of Trump and Kavanaugh.
Solly Mack
(90,767 posts)lunasun
(21,646 posts)the SC.
No birth control or abortion or any choices for them.
Asshole probably heard no a lot from women when sloppy drunk in his youth and didn't like it
He is all still about demeaning and controlling women and using them as props even at the hearing from day 1
Zina Bash and her flashes to his RW base, little giggly girls in school uniforms behind him, the teenage women's basketball team, the prearranged women support letter already in hand, etc
he doth protest too much, methinks.
No wonder some folks want Avenatti to shut up and go away
chowder66
(9,069 posts)victims of this madness.
NatBurner
(2,640 posts)what a couple of fucking assholes
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)for the trauma they've had to endure, which continues to this day, at the hands of these disgusting POS!!!
RecoveringJournalist
(148 posts)If RepubliCONS continue to push for confirmation now it's straight up proof that they collectively have something to hide and/or know that his confirmation is all about saving their asses.
proglib217
(88 posts)...we might as well give the pukes the keys to the kingdom, it's all over. His confirmation could very well trigger an armed civil war.
P.S. Yes, it's not under penalties of perjury, but testimony to the same effect given to the Senate Judiciary Committee would be. And I don't see how Grassley (or Yertl) can turn a blind eye to this submission.
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,346 posts)Several people on DU have expressed frustration over euphemisms being used instead of "lie" or "liar". Regarding Kavanaugh's claim of "innocence", Julie Swetnick states, "This claim is absolutely false and a lie."
Brentar
(4 posts)Couldnt get much more serious then that.
burrowowl
(17,641 posts)Gang rape goes beyond the pale
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)I can only imagine what she is going through, reliving this nightmare.
FakeNoose
(32,639 posts)... also there are other girls/women who got the same treatment. Maybe more depos are coming soon!
peggysue2
(10,828 posts)This is vile and disgusting. It's also a criminal matter.
But wait for the pushback, the fingers pointing at the witness/victim. This is what happens when privileged assholes think they can do and get away with . . . ANYTHING.
And you know why this rings true to women?
Because we've been there. Maybe not with these specific details but as young women we've experienced these humiliating, abusive, aggressive behaviors from young men who treat women like pieces of meat with no agency of our own.
And now a perpetrator, a man who has the gall to proclaim himself a 'virgin' for many years believes he is entitled to a lifelong appointment to the Supreme Court.
This is what happens when accountability and common decency is thrown out the window.
This scenario has nothing to do with consensual sex, fooling around or even groping in dark corners. This is a rape, an act of abhorrent violence against women. Doesn't matter if it occurred 30+ years ago or last week. Doesn't matter if these young men were drunk as skunks. The acts were premeditated and gross.
Reprehensible!
saidsimplesimon
(7,888 posts)Yesterday, I posted a comment stating annoyance with Mr. Avenatti's dominance in this forum based on "entertaining tweets". Deliver the pearl, or stfu, well, he did and I will stfu.
Gothmog
(145,242 posts)It is still a very powerful document
honest.abe
(8,678 posts)And why would it make any difference in this case?
Gothmog
(145,242 posts)A declaration is in effect an affidavit and depo is the transcript of oral testimony taken before a court reporter. This declaration is sworn to under oath and the Senate needs to pay attention to it
honest.abe
(8,678 posts)Stallion
(6,474 posts)Gothmog
(145,242 posts)This is a very powerful document
Pacifist Patriot
(24,653 posts)Botany
(70,504 posts)But how many "good christians," house freedom caucus folk, and value voters are
still OK w/Kavanaugh's drugging and raping women?
duforsure
(11,885 posts)And then this comes out , he could have played a part in gang rapes of underage women they drugged up or illegally gave booze to , so they could gang rape them then . If he as was claimed played any part of this , he needs to be criminally charged and gone after now, and more reports of this kind of behavior will come out, some even worse maybe, and trump and the gop knew about all this and still wanted him on the court for them. Talk about a disaster for trump and the gop. This guy shouldn't even be on the bench , let alone the highest court in this country. trump and the gop have just completely screwed themselves over good this time. There goes the Senate, and all chances on keeping the House. Their credibility is around zero about now on anything they say or claim.
LAS14
(13,783 posts)Makes you wonder what constitutes a "background check" conducted by the FBI for a supreme court nominee. Sounds like the didn't have to dig deep to discover this sleazy past.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Oneironaut
(5,495 posts)Republicans as a whole said, We dont care what he did. Were voting him in anyways. Some of them dont even think he did anything wrong, and the rest dont care.
This is where we are now as a nation.
watoos
(7,142 posts)I try to never release negative energy into the universe, being positive can cause miracles.
Oneironaut
(5,495 posts)I have absolutely no faith in the Republicans to do the right thing.
handmade34
(22,756 posts)I am disgusted and disheartened at finding our Country in this place...
Pepsidog
(6,254 posts)time and while we drank a lot drugging and raping women was not normal activity. In fact, I went to an exclusive HS in NJ, then college and law school at the same time as Kavenaugh. Not the same schools, and I was a football jock and had I seen this behavior some heads would have been knocked around. His HS yearbook post tells you all you need to know about Kavenaugh. He was an arrogant prick who thought he could do whatever he wanted to whom ever he wanted. Mommy was a judge and Im sure he thought he was protected
MichMan
(11,929 posts)Pepsidog
(6,254 posts)moreland01
(739 posts)anybody else wonder why she kept going back to these parties if she knew this was going on? I graduated in 1982. I knew back then to keep an eye on my drink even though the term "date rape drug" hadn't been invented yet. I kept a close eye on my friends, and was aware of guys getting girls inebriated in order to take advantage. If I thought that was the purpose of the party, I would leave and never go back.
I'm curious the mindset of Julie that she would attend 10 such parties.
MichMan
(11,929 posts)Also witnessed women getting drugged and gang raped multiple times and never reported it to the authorities. While it has been a long time since I was 18, pretty certain I would have reported something like that and wouldn't go back to more of those parties
IluvPitties
(3,181 posts)OnDoutside
(19,956 posts)Omaha Steve
(99,632 posts)airmid
(500 posts)Glimmer of Hope
(5,823 posts)nothing?
llmart
(15,539 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Is that some sort of a sneaky question?
The declaration states that she observed this happen many times, ultimately becoming the victim.
Glimmer of Hope
(5,823 posts)who stand by and do nothing! Good grief.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Since the declaration says she saw this going on many times, I thought you were asking about her.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)Glimmer of Hope
(5,823 posts)And environment to understand if she did not do anything until now.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)I wouldn't. my niece and sisters wouldn't, my Mom NEVER would have...
Not buying it Glimmer....
treestar
(82,383 posts)and in that privileged group, no one would do anything to punish those boys.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)An effective deal that has taken out Many abusers.
If a complaint is filed in the jurisdiction an investigation would commence.. if there were credible claims.
We just saw that with the Cosby conviction.
karin_sj
(810 posts)Right about now would be a good time for a man who participated in these horrible attacks on women, and who has some shred of decency and feelings of guilt, to come forward and admit what exactly what took place back then.
Of course, this probably won't happen, but it sounds like there were many boys/men who participated in these gang rapes/assaults. A decent man would come forward, admit that it was wrong, and tell the truth about what happened and whether or not Kavanaugh was one of the men who assaulted these incapacitated women.
Ilsa
(61,695 posts)it happening but did nothing to stop it, even though I knew it was wrong. I just wanted to fit in, so I kept my mouth shut."
karin_sj
(810 posts)I'm sure there were quite a few men who were there and didn't participate. They need to come forward on behalf of the victims and our country.
Hekate
(90,686 posts)Pachamama
(16,887 posts)There is a difference- although I am sure she will be deposed at some point....
torius
(1,652 posts)This could have all been an ATTEMPT to lose his virginity. She says he and Judge groped girls and spiked the punch to enable others to rape. Even if they did not rape (more info and witnesses are needed) that's still criminal sexual abuse.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Doesn't mean they were able to get their turn, just that they were in line.
We know Mark Judge did, because his ex gf or wife says he had told he had participated in such an event.
Laura in LA
(38 posts)The two points I keep hearing repeatedly:
1) She is years older than Kavanaugh. Why was she going to high school parties?
2) Why did she keep going to these terrible parties and not warn or help other women?
These victim-shaming tactics need to be countered .
Eliot Rosewater
(31,112 posts)Laura in LA
(38 posts)Cha
(297,232 posts)blame the victim.
I can see why Dr Ford didn't tell her parents..
Link to tweet
I just looked at the thread and there's a "correction".. Ralph Blasey is a Jr not a IV.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,112 posts)Laura in LA
(38 posts)answered the RW talking points about Ms. Swetnick I mentioned last night.