>>3140515 (pb)

Ford demands "fair and impartial" treatment after her team plays games, stalls, and delays for an impossible to disprove negative.

Ok, Katz. The only way to determine the validity of the allegation is to OBJECTIVELY weigh the credibility of the witnesses.

Complainant Ford:

1) waited 36 years to make a vague allegation ONLY AFTER Kavanaugh was a SCOTUS nominee

2) whose story has changed

3) who cannot name time or place

4) of an unwanted touching over the clothes and mouth

5) who allegedly "passed" an inadmissible lie-detector test only confirming her statement was accurate, not that it was true

6) who claims discomfort in enclosed spaces yet teaches for a living

7) who destroys evidence of her publicly available opinions and motives in advance of her allegations

and

8) who refuses any and all accommodations to timely cooperate with Senate Judiciary Committee while flanked by a high-power politically motivated expensive legal team

Respondent Kavanaugh:

1) denies any and all allegations

2) has been vetted as a Judicial officer since 2006

3) has no known similar complaints, civil or criminal

and

4) cannot prove a negative

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, you are charged with weighing the credibility of the witnesses in this case. You may recall their testimonies and manner in which the testimony was given. You are empowered to use your common sense when determining who you believe is more credible. The complainant has the burden of proof in this case. Is Complainant Ford a credible witness?

NO CRIMINAL OR CIVIL LAWYER WOULD TOUCH THIS CASE WITH A 10 FOOT POLE UNLESS, OF COURSE, THEY WERE DOING THE BIDDING OF THE SWAMP