The third accuser of Brett Kavanaugh, Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, story is wildly open-ended. She claims to have seen Kavanaugh at several parties where he was drinking. Reports show that at the time of these alleged high school parties the accuser, Julie Swetnick, was attending college – which is strange enough.
Swtnick’s claim is not that Kavanaugh raped her but that he was present at a party where she says she was raped by multiple high school boys. She also insists that she witnessed Kavanaugh being aggressive towards other girls at these parties.
Harvard law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz is sick of the circus surrounding these accusations:
“That affidavit is so deeply flawed and so open-ended that any good lawyer, any good defense attorney would be able to tear that apart in 30 seconds,” Dershowitz said on Fox News. “It’s an embarrassment to the law that anybody would file an affidavit like that filled with hearsay.”
He then went on to criticize the content of her written testimony, saying it was “filled with hearsay. Filled with, ‘Well, I was raped, but he didn’t rape me. He was there. He saw it. Where was he? There are witnesses. People told me. It happened ten times. I went back, I knew there were rapes going on but I went back to the party.'”
In the affidavit, Swetnick said on numerous occasions at these parties she witnessed Kavanaugh and Judge “drink excessively and engage in highly inappropriate conduct, including being overly aggressive with girls and not taking ‘No’ for an answer.” She said this conduct included “the fondling and grabbing of girls without their consent.”
Swetnick also said she “witnessed efforts” by Kavanaugh, Judge, and others “to become inebriated and disoriented so they could then be ‘gang-raped’ in a side room or bedroom by a ‘train’ of numerous boys.” She also said she has a “firm recollection” of boys lined up outside of rooms at these parties “waiting for their ‘turn’ with a girl inside the room,” and that Kavanaugh and Judge were among them.
Democrats have continued to push the narrative of ‘guilty until proven innocent’. Even suggesting that Kavanaugh testify before his accusers are heard. Which would not only make it impossible to know what he was defending himself against but could potentially allow the accuser time to adjust their stories based off of Kavanaugh’s testimony.