Accusing a rape victim of secretly wanting to be raped isn't a ...

[mckeown1128]

Accusing a rape victim of secretly wanting to be raped isn't a part of a defense attorney's job. I am so saddened at how so many can play this story down.


I would love for somone to start a poll question on whether this is an ethical defense tactic.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

1. What story?

[Name removed]

2. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Raven]

3. Yes. It is not a legitimate defense. What it is is a play to the vile

prejudices of a jury. I haven't figured out if this story is really true, but if it is, it is an awful reflection on HC. And some of the posts here saying that she had to do it because she was defending the accused are either ignorant or bogus. In the position of a defense lawyer, you mount the most aggressive defense you can within the bounds of ethics.

[LisaL]

5. What jury?

The case never went to trial.
How low can you people go?
Digging something up from over 30 years ago, and acting all outraged about it.
Pathetic in my view.

[Raven]

7. No jury? OK. How does that make her defense of this guy any more ethical?

[PeaceNikki]

15. She didn't even use this line of questioning.

Article claims she intended to.

"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. "

INTENT to is not the same as abusing her on the stand, is it?

[Raven]

19. In a courtroom or before a judge, asking for a mental evaluation of

this child is enough to plant the seed. Tell me that she was requesting that evaluation because she wanted to make sure the kid was OK...right, that's it. Let's split a few more hairs.

[PeaceNikki]

24. I'd think that's pretty standard for rape cases. Why is nobody placing blame on the prosocuter for

NOT doing his job? Instead, the defense lawyer who didn't even get to trial is at fault for this guy's light sentence? Where's the logic in that?

[LisaL]

30. He might have been trying to do his job, but had to accept the plea

deal.
It appears from reading the article the girl's mother did not want a trial.

[LisaL]

18. How exactly does it make it un-ethical?

Questioning the credibility is the standard defense in rape cases.
Otherwise, you might as well not do it.
Furthermore, all your obamabots claims that she accosted the 12 year old girl on the stand, in front of the jury, could not be true.
The case never went to trial.

[Raven]

23. Well, here's how it works among ethical lawyers: let's assume the child seduced

the defendant. It simply doesn't matter. It is rape, statutory rape in the case of a willing partner, but rape nonetheless. HC is a Yale Law grad. She knows this stuff.

[hiaasenrocks]

27. It makes a difference, and not only in terms of sentencing.

It makes a difference as to whether the state can prove that the defendant is guilty as charged, and you're talking about two different circumstances there.

[LisaL]

This was over 30 years ago.

Do you even know the laws for the state back then?

[LisaL]

32. This was over 30 years ago.

Do you even know the laws for the state back then?

[Midlodemocrat]

39. Raven, I know you know this stuff better than I do, but a court

appointed attorney is still charged with doing the best job possible for her client, regardless of the crime. Does it suck? Sometimes it does. But it's the law.

[MediaBabe]

49. 1970

Everybody wants to ignore that this occurred in 1970 when everything was defined differently. Even statutory rape. Cripes, in 1970 girls age 12 were still allowed to get married in some states.

[BadgerLaw2010]

65. Credibility is rather material in rape cases.

[lligrd]

4. Apparently Anything Hillary Does Is OK

and they call us a cult.

[CubFan7125]

6. Actually It Is

It is a defense attorneys job to do whatever possible to keep his client out of jail. At times that can mean accusing the alleged victim. Also, until the trial finishes we don't know if they are victims. Remember the Duke case.

[Unsane]

9. even if it is, why would Hillary "I Care About Kids" Clinton ever take that case?

She is a Yale Law grad and could have worked anywhere in the USA. Why take a case defending child rapists?

[Raven]

14. Well, in fairness, a public defender (if that's what she was) has

to take pretty much everything BUT you are right, she could have passed on that one. I have friends who did that.

[LisaL]

16. Can you read? She did not want to take the case.

She was appointed.

[Raven]

31. Can you think? Are you a lawyer? Do you know how that works?

If you don't then shut up.

[Unsane]

36. Gotcha. So being appointed means she's required to accuse the victim of "wanting it"

:crazy:

[Marie26]

35. Court-appointed

If you actually care, I'll explain it. She was working at the Un. of AK as a law professor, and running the legal aid clinic. The court appointed her to the case because the defendant had requested a female lawyer - the county probably didn't have any female public defenders. Once appointed, she had to accept the case unless there was a conflict of interest, etc. Most courts have a list of private attorneys who have said that they could represent indigent people. She was using her legal skills & Yale education to represent poor people, people who couldn't afford an attorney. She was performing a public service, one that all attorneys are supposed to perform. In this case, that public service resulted in her having to take a pretty bad case.


Edit: adding quote from the article -

"Hillary told me she didn't want to take that case, she made that very clear," recalls prosecutor Gibson, who phoned her with the judge's order.

"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."

[SoxFan]

44. University of Alaska?

Off topic rant:

The abbreviation for Arkansas is "AR". "AK is Alaska. The University of Alaska does not have a law school.

Hillary taught at the University of Arkansas. In fact, she shared an office with my Contracts and Secured Transactions professor.

[Marie26]

45. OK then

Yes, the University of Arkansas.

[Raven]

10. No, no, no! This is why lawyers have a bad name! It is the duty of

a defense attorney to give the accused the best defense possible WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF ETHICS!!! Implying that a 12 year old "wanted it" is way over the line.

[hiaasenrocks]

22. Actually, that's only partly true.

If you read the story, it says that Clinton, acting as defense attorney, had sources who told her about the girl's alleged past false accusations and her state of mind. Like it or not (and most of us don't) that line of inquiry is in bounds.

I'm not even a Hillary supporter, but this story is just ridiculous.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

61. Utterly ignorant statement

"Implying that a 12 year old "wanted it" is way over the line."

No, actually failing to do so is over the line. Any lawyer who failed to do so if it were the best line of defense would be DISBARRED.

Your made-up idea of legal ethics is comical... the greatest violation of legal ethics is to NOT mount the most effective possible defense.

You are welcome to dislike our form of government, but not to just pull stuff out of the air as to what you think constitutes ethical legal behavior.

[BadgerLaw2010]

66. And questioning credibility of complaining witness is ethical. And required.

People seem to have funny notions of what "ethics" are for a criminal defense attorney. His job is to defend his client, not to reach the "right" outcome.

[rodeodance]

8. This is your second post on this within hours. Pures flamebait.

[mckeown1128]

50. This post is not really about a specific candidate.

I wanted to have a discussion on the ethics of accusing a 12 year old rape vicitm of wanting to be raped.

[ErnestoG]

11. Deplorable. If it were Obama as the attorney, the nattering yappers here

would be screaming for his head.

It just boggles the mind what the Hillar-zombies will swallow for their candidate....they will become lax on rape, lax on the war,...

Makes you want to puke.

[PeaceNikki]

12. You didn't even read the article. She didn't accuse the victim of anything.

[bluestateguy]

13. Just imagine

If a male lawyer candidate had done that to a girl the shrieks of rage from Hillary's feminist supporters would be deafening.

[cbayer]

17. I can not believe you are still going after this.

You already have one flame baiting Hillary Haters thread going on it and now you start another.


As I pointed out to you, people on your own team are calling you out.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4748227

Why don't you just try to write a nice positive piece about your candidate.

What in the world makes you feel the need to do this?

[rodeodance]

34. they are not listening--this is a 32 yr old story and these folks only want blood.

[kikiek]

37. Looks like they want a presumption of guilt not innocence. I thought we had rights. Not in everyones

eyes it appears. He shouldn't have been allowed a trial! I bet Obama has defended a few shady characters himself.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

20. Why Don't U You Spend Ten Dollars To Become A Member So You Can Post A Poll And Find Out

~

[Unsane]

21. Why don't you donate for him?

You don't know his financial situation.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

28. With All The Time He Spends Here He Could Come Up With An Ingenious Way To Raise Ten Dollars

~

[MethuenProgressive]

41. You can't be a member and a sockpuppet. Admin ain't that stupid.

~

[MrSlayer]

25. No, but suggesting an alleged rape victim wasn't actually raped is.

And what do ethics have to do with winning the case? Win, at any cost, is the name of the game in court. Lawyers are sleazy, that's their bailiwick.

[Occam Bandage]

26. What are we talking about?

[dailykoff]

29. link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4748049&mesg_id=4748049

[Occam Bandage]

33. Well, that's disturbing on an emotional level, but that's what defense lawyers do.

[Recursion]

38. The rules of the "game" are not her fault

Though certainly I don't like her more now than I did before.

[MethuenProgressive]

40. Spam.

[deadmessengers]

42. This is a bullshit callout.

Every accused person has the right to a zealous defense, and Sen. Clinton was doing her job and doing it well in this case. It would have been completely unethical to "tank" a case just because the accused is thoroughly unsympathetic.

I'm an Obama supporter, BTW - before anyone accuses me of being a Hill-troll.

[mckeown1128]

51. I have no problem with Hillary defending that guy.

I have a problem with her accusing a 12 year old rape vicitm of secretly wanting to be raped. That I believe is not an ethical defense of her client.

[PeaceNikki]

57. You keep saying that she "accused a 12 year old rape victim of secretly wanting to be raped"

Where? Where did she even come close to that?

The article says she attacked the credibility of the victim. That she "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"

How is that accusing her of "wanting to be raped"?

She brought up credibility which is paramount in defending rape. Credibility and claming the victim for the crime occuring are very different.

[mckeown1128]

63. How exactly does implying that the 12 year old girl...

sought out and fantasized about the rapist have to do with her being raped. Can you not see that it is the "she wanted it defense?"

[LostInAnomie]

43. It just shows the mentality of someone that will do anything to win.

Even if it does mean accusing a little girl of "wanting it".

[Baconfoot]

46. As a rape survivor myself, I must say that everyone is entitled to a defense, even an accused rapist

I find this post and the other OP on the same topic utterly offensive.
The characterization of the defense is ludicrously distorted.

I can only hope this crap isn't coming directly from Obama's campaign.

[mckeown1128]

52. I never said that rapists don't deserve a strong defense.

I have a problem with a rape victim being accused of enjoying the rape.

[goodgd_yall]

54. Where you are getting

that the defense was implying the victim wanted or enjoyed being raped is beyond me. The defense implied the victim may not have been raped by her client because she had been caught in lies in the past.

[PeaceNikki]

59. That's what I am trying to figure out. It's being twisted in a very Rovian manner.

:wtf:

[mckeown1128]

62. You are ignoring this nugget from the defense.

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.

That sounds to me like the old "she wanted it" BS defense case.

[ecstatic]

47. particularly a 12 year old rape victim... nt

[TexasObserver]

48. K&R

[uppityperson]

53. How is this topic NOT a continuation of this other one of yours....?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4748049&mesg_id=4748049

[mckeown1128]

64. The other one was my opinion about Hillary's actions on that case.

This one is to get feedback from what people think of that kind of defense in a rape case. I have been trying to leave Hillary out of this thread in order to get some REAL discussion going on that line of defense. (trying to leave the partisan talk both pro and anti Hillary out of the conversation)

[boppers]

68. You're inventing and implying something that isn't there.

Even if it was a daughter intentionally getting her father drunk so he would sleep with her (great biblical story), either or both parties "wanting it" does not justify rape.

I repeat: Whether or not a person wants to have sex is not what makes something rape.

[rug]

55. Had you any legal knowledge you'd realize you're assuming a fact not in evidence

and this entire thread would be ruled objectionable.

Of course, with no legal knowledge you'd realize this thread is objectionable, if not obnoxious.

[Quixote1818]

56. I am no law expert but that sounds over the line to me. Important topic. nt

[BadgerLaw2010]

67. That's why you are not a law expert.

Failure to pursue material issue (complaining witness credibility) is malpractice.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

58. you need to seek help, my friend...call somebody please?

[Quixote1818]

60. The OP is asking for a discussion. I think he/she brings up an important topic. nt