Newsday: An early look at how Clinton deals with crisis

[Zueda]

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/ny-usark245589997feb24,0,2670956.story?page=1

In 1975, a 27-year-old Hillary Rodham, acting as a court-appointed attorney, attacked the credibility of a 12-year-old girl in mounting an aggressive defense for an indigent client accused of rape in Arkansas - using her child development background to help the defendant.

Rodham, records show, questioned the sixth grader's honesty and claimed she had made false accusations in the past. She implied that the girl often fantasized and sought out "older men" like Taylor, according to a July 1975 affidavit signed "Hillary D. Rodham" in compact cursive.

The victim, now 46, told Newsday that she was raped by Taylor, denied that she wanted any relationship with him and blamed him for contributing to three decades of severe depression and other personal problems.

"It's not true, I never sought out older men - I was raped," the woman said in an interview in the fall. Newsday is withholding her name as the victim of a sex crime.

[DUyellow]

1. is this true?

[Zueda]

3. I doubt Newsweek is making it up. n/t

[Faygo Kid]

16. Newsday, not Newsweek.

[Zueda]

19. Thanks. at least i got it right in the OP. n/t

[ingac70]

2. OMG. n/t.

[THUNDER HANDS]

4. it was in Newsday today

I didn't know she was a legal aid attorney.

[lligrd]

5. I Can Picture Her Doing That

Especially after recent events.

[K Gardner]

10. After yesterday and today, yes, I believe it. She's capable of anything.

[IndianaGreen]

24. Hillary will do anything to win

She was a corporate lawyer in Arkansas. She didn't fight for the little people then.

[Bread and Circus]

6. That's kind of fascinating. I don't think I could ever be a lawyer as I just couldn't

go through with defending someone if I had any idea they might have raped someone, let alone a 12 year old girl.

I understand that Clinton was doing her job as a public defendant.

[ingac70]

11. I don't know how she sleeps at night...

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/hillary-versus-the-allegedly-raped-child

Hillary wrote about this episode in her book “Living History” and totally mischaracterized it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"One day the Washington County prosecuting attorney, Mahlon Gibson, called to tell me an indigent prisoner accused of raping a twelve year-old girl wanted a woman lawyer. Gibson had recommended that the criminal court judge, Maupin Cummings, appoint me. I told Mahlon I really didn’t feel comfortable taking on such a client, but Mahlon gently reminded me that I couldn’t very well refuse the judge’s request.

When I visited the alleged rapist in the county jail, I learned that he was an uneducated “chicken catcher.” His job was to collect chickens from the large warehouse farms for one of the local processing plants. He denied the charges against him and insisted that the girl, a distant relative, had made up her story.

I conducted a thorough investigation and obtained expert testimony from an eminent scientist from New York, who cast doubt on the evidentiary value of the blood and semen the prosecutor claimed proved the defendant’s guilt in the rape. Because of that testimony, I negotiated with the prosecutor for the defendant to plead guilty to sexual abuse.

When I appeared with my client before Judge Cummings to present that plea, he asked me to leave the courtroom while he conducted the necessary examination to determine the factual basis for the plea. I said, “Judge, I can’t leave. I’m his lawyer.” “Well,” said the judge, “I can’t talk about these things in front of a lady.” “Judge,” I reassured him, “don’t think of me as anything but a lawyer.” The judge walked the defendant through his plea and then sentenced him.

It was shortly after this experience that Ann Henry and I discussed setting up Arkansas’s first rape hot line…" --Hillary Clinton "Living History"

[Divernan]

54. In my county's PD office, all lawyers are allowed to choose one crime they won't defend

And most of the women choose rape, i.e, they will not work to defend a rapist. It's a tough choice -others choose not to defend an accused child abuser. (On edit: but of course someone else in the office will be assigned to defend the accused.)

And many lawyers just will not work in criminal defense work. While in law school, I had a part time job researching constitutional law and writing an appeal brief for a local attorney, whom I came to find out was the mob's lawyer for pornography cases (freedom of speech and all that). He was a nice guy - very bright - Harvard Law. Came out of law school fired up to defend the poor and the indigent and keep them from being railroaded into prison. He told me the first year of his practise he handled hundreds of cases and didn't make enough money to stay alive. He learned that the only way to be a successful criminal attorney, in his words, was to defend successful criminals. So he said good bye to his youthful ideals and proceeded to make a lot of money. That was my only brush with criminal law, except for just a few civil suits arising out of criminal convictions.

I have contempt for all the criminal lawyers who know their clients (the successful criminals) are guilty and get them off on technicalities, and back on the streets to commit more crimes - in part to pay off their legal bills to said criminal lawyers.

[JVS]

7. Oh wow. This issue will be HUGH in this forum

:popcorn:

[Bluerthanblue]

8. oh ouch.... this

really does bother me.

I understand the concept of 'defense attorney' and the necessity that people willingly and effectively take on the job-

But, I can imagine Hillary in this role, and it disturbs me more than I can say.


My heart is with the victim.-

peace~

[sfam]

9. So why did she create a rape hotline based on this?

I get that Hillary needed to defend her client as best as possible, but if she ended up getting the guy off by impuning the integrity of the rape victem - this is what the article states - then how does this case make her then want to create a rape hotline?

Has someone read her book who can comment on this, 'cause this is the part that sounds really false to me.

[dkf]

12. She realized what a scum she was so she was trying to make amends.

Too late Hillary.

[sfam]

20. Just guessing here, but I'm thinking you didn't read the book...

Perhaps there's an actual rationale for this - I was honestly just wondering if she had one.

[dkf]

22. Nope, didn't read the book. But it doesn't take a genius...

[sfam]

26. I coulda made my own guess...AGAIN - does anyone know the rationale that...

she gives for this?

[sloppyjoe25s]

55. I Read her whole book - and she WROTE the whole thing to "run for office"

I just re-read the section here.

It is a blatant attempt by Mrs. Clinton to "innoculate" against this by writing about it - and having her
characterization come out. It is thinly written - and the part about setting up the hotline
comes as a non-sequiter.

Now that more information about the victim is out - it is clear this could be bad for Mrs. Clinton
Especially with women. Since she has singularly touted her advocacy for women.

Also - I have a close friend who is a criminal defense attorney and has worked having to defend accused rapists
as a public defender.

She (my friend the lawyer) - has told me there is "NO EXCUSE" for attacking the character of the young girl and accusing
her of desiring older men. This sort of tactic is simply not part of an ethical vigorous defense. It is not necessary and
speaks instdead to Mrs. Clinton's character even at that young age: "Win at any cost"

[Divernan]

56. Your interpretation is 100% correct

nt

[dkf]

59. Thank you.

[MadBadger]

13. I dont know how I feel about this

I recognize that she has a job as an attorney to defend her client to the best of her ability. But there is just something disgusting about going after a 12 year old.

[RamboLiberal]

14. As a woman this makes me sick but that's the job of a

defense attorney fortunately or unfortunately. I'm an Obama supporter but I wouldn't use this against her. She was appointed this guy's attorney and she defended him well even if she had to go this route.

[dkf]

28. She seemed to go beyond the call though.

The article says her paperwork was of the volume usual for a murder defense.

[RamboLiberal]

41. Well even an Obama can't accuse Hillary of doing

anything half way. Not surprising a new lawyer and female(where you had to prove yourself 2 or 3 times better than a man) would go all out even in defending a scumbag.

[jmg257]

31. Right - accusing a 12 yr old of wanting to be raped by older men was her job...dispicable.

[RamboLiberal]

42. Defense lawyers do despicable things to get clients off

If I was ever accused of a crime I'd want a pit bull lawyer like Hillary.

[IndianaGreen]

47. Ethical attorneys don't do despicable things

Hillary seems like one of those amoral characters in Boston Legal.

[Jim Lane]

51. I agree with you completely

As a lawyer supporting Obama, I think it's very unfortunate when a lawyer is criticized for discharging his or her duty to the client. People have talked about "unethical" practices -- if someone can point to a specific action by Hillary Clinton that was in violation of legal ethics, that would be worth knowing, but merely "distasteful" doesn't cut it.

[Divernan]

57. She had no prior experience defending any criminal, let alone an accused rapist.

My state's code of ethics requires lawyers to not take cases in fields in which they have no experience, unless they work with an appropriately experienced co-counsel.

[Jim Lane]

69. She was asked to take this particular case

From the article linked in the OP:

"I didn't feel comfortable taking on such a client, but Mahlon gently reminded me that I couldn't very well refuse the judge's request," the eventual first lady writes in "Living History."

It's telling that most of the posters here are excoriating Clinton for doing too good a job on behalf of the rapist -- or, more precisely, on behalf of the alleged rapist -- but your criticism is that she might not have had the background to do a good enough job.

I haven't read her book and I don't know what resources (such as more experienced co-counsel) were available to her clinic. I do know that poor people in America often don't get optimal representation, and that what clinics provide is often much better than what the defendant would otherwise get.

[Divernan]

53. She went overboard on this case and was abusive of the child.

Read the whole article cited in the OP and my comments in post 52 below.

[Adelante]

15. Holy shit

:wow:

[Johnny__Motown]

17. I no longer have the words to express my disgust for Hillary Clinton

Attacking the credibility of a 12 year old girl who was raped.

Game over

[Yael]

18. This is devistating.

Wow.

[Perry Logan]

21. I've concluded that Clintophobia is a full-blown mental disorder.

It's a delusional state. The sufferers frequently boast about how personal it is with them. When they assert that they can believe anything about the Clintons--as occurs in this thread--they are in fact bragging about their own pathology.

Did the Clintons steal these people's wallets, or what? They are only a few steps away from the psychotic wingers who keep count of all the people the Clintons have murdered, unbeknownst to the daylight world.

Strangely, healthy-minded people have no problem with the Clintons and remain unaware of the depths of their scullduggery.

[dkf]

25. Are you discounting this account or are you defending her?

[Johnny__Motown]

27. If you have evidence that disproves this claim please share it I don't want to believe this but I do

[Perry Logan]

63. Here are two refutations of the smear--one from an Obama supporter.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4755689
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4752185&mesg_id=4752185

[D23MIURG23]

70. I find post #52 on this thread more convincing.

[whatchamacallit]

29. Ha, like you? Too bad there's not enough of you "healthy" folks to take the White House.

[Bluerthanblue]

33. denial kills.

Co-dependents are complicit.

If "healthy-minded people" have "no problem with the Clintons" then they are either in denial, or not as 'healthy minded' as you claim.

peace~

[theredpen]

35. You're right! I'll seek therapy

Hopefully, after a lot of that therapy, I will no longer read and believe articles from news magazines with a solid track record of good reporting. Thanks for your advice. :sarcasm:

[ErnestoG]

46. Slightly below Clinton Hero Worship Syndrome?

[D23MIURG23]

65. What does that have to do with the OP?

[LisaL]

23. Oh dear lord.

They digged something from over 30 years ago.
She did not want to be this guy's defense attorney, but when she was appointed his defense attorney, she had to provide him with the best possible defense. She would have been negligent otherwise.

[IndianaGreen]

30. Best defense do not include destroying a 12-year old victim

John Edwards would not have sunk to the level Hillary did. This is totally disgusting because it shows how far Hillary is willing to go in order to win.

[LisaL]

32. Oh give me a break.

Questioning the credibility of the allegations is the standard defense in any rape case.
Otherwise you might as well not bother with the defense.

[IndianaGreen]

37. Attacking a child, a young girl of 12. That's the stuff that people ought to know about Hillary

Let the voters know about this and decide if this is the sort of person they want as President.

Hillary victimized a victim!

[skater314159]

36. Blame the victim IS NOT "the best possible defense". nt

[THUNDER HANDS]

38. actually, attacking her credibility is the best defense

there really isn't much in a way of other options. Unless she just wanted to convince him to take a guilty plea and hope for a lesser sentence.

But if he refused to take a guilty plea, she has to offer the best defense she can. it's her duty.

[Abacus]

44. What would happen if she refused to take the case? /nt

[skater314159]

49. She could question her testimony or credibility...

... but this went beyond that. This is a level of personal attack that makes me wonder why she defended this man in this manner against a 12 YEAR OLD GIRL.

Also, it is common in rape cases for defense lawyers to try stuff like this - and it always bothers me that the woman is as much (if not moreso) on trial as the perp... this case really highlights that since the victim was 12 at the time of the rape.

This is why women and girls are afraid to come forward and seek the help of the legal system in cases of rape... as a former police I have seen other cases where women who were VICTIMS were emotionally and mentally abused by defense lawyers trying "to offer the best defense they can".

Don't ETHICS apply? I mean if she really wanted to make a good case she could have gotten fake witnesses or faked evidence - but that would be unethical, just as I think attacking this girl was.

This isn't about who I think should be Pres... this is about what I see as an unwarranted attack on a 12 year old victim.

[mculator]

34. I read it

I like the part where everyone agrees she had to do it and that it spawned her creation of a rape hotline. Also the last line is interesting, she bears Hill no Ill Will. Isn't that a triple rhyme??? :)

[thoughtcrime1984]

39. Yet another "ick" moment for Hillary

Let's start getting after McCain with this vigor...

[TreasonousBastard]

40. Well, lessee here...

between that article and the book she

was pretty much ordered to take on a criminal defense case

investigated the case and found problems with the physical evidence

plead the guy down to a lesser charge while being insulted by the judge

Somewhere during all of this, interviewed the girl.

So, what's the problem?

[Abacus]

43. Okay, I was wrong

when I said yesterday that nothing more would surprise me about Hillary.

:mad: :cry:

"In terms of what's good for the little girl? It would have been hell on the victim. But that wasn't Hillary's problem."

[OzarkDem]

45. How about Obama's gay sex and coke story?

Has as much credibility.

[lligrd]

48. Neither Involve A 12 Year Old Girl nt

[Recursion]

50. Err... there are a lot of reparte's to this, and that ain't one

Nobody doubts the veracity of this story (that I know of); the "gay sex and coke" story is based on the testimony of one guy who agrees to take a polygraph if somebody will give him 5 grand. Before he takes it.

[cali]

58. that's wack. And sorry to disappoint you but the guy FAILED the

lie detector test. that story had zero cred. This story is factual. Having said that, it was her job and she did it. Unlike some here, I'm not completely nuts and don't make shit up left and right, like declaring that Obama attracted very few people to a packed rally, or putting words in Obama's mouth that he never said. YOU did both those reprehensible things.

[Divernan]

52. There are many things ethically wrong and questionable with how she handled this case.

I'm a retired atty. who did civil trial work, taught at a law school where I was co-director of a legal aid clinic for the poor, & then went on to work for state govt. I read the entire original article (and had read Clinton's book) and here's my view of what happened.


The rape occurred no earlier than 2 a.m. The accused rapist (Clinton plea bargained him down to 10 months for unlawful fondling ) was described as a hard drinking man who, on the advice of his jailhouse friends, demanded a female lawyer - thinking it would get him points with a jury.

"At 4:50 a.m., the girl walked into a local emergency room, badly shaken. The doctor's report noted that she had injuries consistent with rape. Sgt. Dale Gibson, the department's lead investigator in the case, interviewed her as she huddled with her mother. She offered a chilling detail - a threat from Taylor and his friends. "If I did say anything about it, they would catch me out later," she told the investigator."

Read the entire article, please. It is chock full of details to show you how revolting Clinton's handling of this case was. At that time Clinton was director of the Legal Aid Clinic. This is significant for a number of reasons.

1. She could have handed the case off to someone else.

2. She had no legal trial experience and was required by the code of professional conduct to either refuse to take the case, or get co-counsel with adequate criminal/rape trial experience.

3. Legal aid clinics (based at the law school) have quite limited budgets. As Director, she had to
parcel out her limited resources so that the maximum number of indigents could be represented. She invested time and funds into this case as though it were a capital murder trial.

This 12 year old received a hospital examination at 4:30 a.m., a few hours after she was raped.It provided evidence of rape. At that point, an accused rapist & his attorney can CHOOSE from 2 mutually exclusive defenses. Either he can argue it was concensual sex, or deny he was the perpetrator.

Clinton, acting like a bulldog, according to other lawyers there at the time, pursued BOTH defenses, and mounted such an aggressive defense, local lawyers commented it would have been appropriate for a capital murder trial. She hired a New York based forensic expert to "cast doubt on the evidence" - imagine that. How many Arkansas indigent defendants had an expert brought all the way from New York? That must have cost thousands of dollars of the clinic's limited budget. That kind of money would have and should have been spent on behalf of things like pursuing deadbeats for child support, or helping indigents with landlord tenant or health care issues, or paying LOCAL psychologists in child abuse cases. And any trial lawyer will tell you that when it comes to selecting an expert/hired gun for the battle of the experts, you are much better off to go with someone as local as possible - at least from the same state. This is because the judges and juries are suspicious of outsiders and partial to locals.Note all her hired gun expert could do was "cast doubt". Even with this expensive expert witness, Clinton couldn't get the evidence thrown out. She also went after the victim and argued that the girl "was attracted to older men" and had a history of claiming personal attacks and lying. The evidence of record does not offer any proof of those arguments.

During her first few months on the case, Rodham fired off no fewer than 19 subpoenas, affidavits and motions - almost as much paper as was typical for a capital murder case that year, according to case files on microfilm. She successfully petitioned to obtain Taylor's underwear for independent testing after the state medical examiner found traces of semen and blood. (Again, more fees to be paid for by the law clinic.) She also secured Taylor's release on $5,000 bond after getting his boss at the factory to vouch for him. (If he had run off, the Clinic would have had to pay off that bond.)
But the record shows that Rodham was also intent on questioning the girl's credibility. That line of defense crystallized in a July 28, 1975, affidavit requesting the girl undergo a psychiatric examination at the university's clinic.

"I have been informed that the complainant is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and to engage in fantasizing," wrote Rodham, without referring to the source of that allegation. "I have also been informed that she has in the past made false accusations about persons, claiming they had attacked her body."

(Strange choice of language, "I have been informed" rather than "the evidence will prove".)

Dale Gibson, the investigator, doesn't recall seeing evidence that the girl had fabricated previous attacks. The assistant prosecutor who handled much of the case for Mahlon Gibson died several years ago. The prosecutor's files on the case, which would have included such details, were destroyed more than decade ago when a flood swept through the county archives, Mahlon Gibson said. Those files also would have included the forensics evidence referenced in "Living History."

Prior to this, in the early '70's, Clinton studied at Yale's renowned child study center to identify physical and behavioral clues of child abuse. Her fluency on the topic is evident in the Arkansas court filings: "I have . . . been told by an expert in child psychology that children in early adolescence tend to exaggerate or romanticize sexual experience and that adolescents with disorganized families, such as the complainant's, are even much more prone to such behavior. . . .she exhibits an unusual stubbornness and temper when she does not get her way."
###############################
So here we see Clinton substituting Clinton's own evaluation of the child's behavior as though Clinton were an independent court appointed psychologist. This whole case just stinks!

And any of us who have suffered through the terrible 12's with an adolescent daughter know that nearly all 12 year old girls are prone to exaggeration, romanticization, stubbornness and temper. Does that mean that if they are raped, they are not to be believed, even in the presence of medical evidence of rape?

I think Clinton included the self-flattering account of this case in her book because it was a time bomb in her history and she wanted to defuse it. There is no logical connection between having gotten this man off with 10 months in jail, and being inspired to start a rape hotline. This young girl didn't need and would not have benefitted from a rape hotline. Her mother got her to the hospital within hours of the rape. I think Rape Hotlines are very important - I just fail to see how this particular case would have inspired Clinton to instigate one.

Having read the entire account of this convoluted case, I think the 40 something "heavy drinker" was guilty as sin, and that Clinton knew it. So it could have been her attempt to neutralize any damage to her future reputation to be able to say, "But I started a rape hotline."

One final comment. We see Clinton exhibit poor strategy decisions, failing to take into account the local situation, and squandering money on hotshot experts. Fast forward to her current campaign consultants and failure to control her campaign funds.

One law professor commented that criminal was lucky to have Clinton for an attorney. "In terms of what's good for the little girl? It would have been hell on the victim. But that wasn't Hilary's problem." The victim says it was her mother, who had recently been abandoned by her husband, who pushed for a quick plea deal to avoid the humiliation of having her daughter testify in open court. The mother, who died several years ago, was so eager to end the ordeal she coached her daughter's statements and interrupted interviews with police, Dale Gibson recalls.

"We both wanted it to be over with," the victim told Newsday. "They kept asking me the same questions over and over. I was crying all the time."

[nolabels]

60. I suspect your post will be attacked before i post this but nice job at any rate

:thumbsup:

[Muzza]

61. Pathetic Propaganda

I am not even interested to look into the specifics of the case...How pathetic that you feel the need to draw on material form 33 years ago to smear Hillary Clinton. Shame on you.

[rontun]

62. I'd say this must be regarded as a positive for Sen. Clinton

In reading the story, if it is accurate, Senator Clinton was clearly living up to her responsibilities as an attorney.

She was not, at the time, acting as a children's or women's advocate, she was stuck representing a reprehensible character, ensuring that his constitutional rights were preserved. It was the District Attorney's responsibility to advocate for the victim.

This indicates to me Senator Clinton's commitment to fulfilling her obligations even though in doing so it placed her in an excruciatingly painful position. For that she deserves credit.

I only wish she'd advocate as strongly for holding the Bush administration accountable for its criminal activities.

[Avalux]

66. I have a 12 year old daughter. No excuse to attack a child, even if it's doing your job.

Even if it was true the girl WAS seeking out older men, she was still a child and not responsible for anything that happened with the defendent.

I don't get how Hillary could have done such a reprehensible thing. Where was her compassion and humanity?

[Perry Logan]

64. Logan's Law: All anti-Hillary threads are bullshit. Here are two refutations...

...one from an avowed Obama supporter, no less:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4752185&mesg_id=4752185
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4755689

(And if you can't trust an Obama supporter, whom CAN you trust?)

[Avalux]

67. Thanks - I wrote post #66 without knowledge this had been refuted.

I can't imagine such a thing.

[GodlessBiker]

68. I'm for Obama, I'm a criminal defense lawyer, and I see nothing wrong with what Clinton did.

She would have committed malpractice if she did not assertively question her client's accuser.