Originally posted by Robtard
And why isn't this then underage sexual victim of Republican Matt Gaetz not cooperating? Threats? Paid off? She's afraid? Probably a bit of each.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
She may have been paid or believe she will be rewarded for her silence. She may fear being identified or incrimminating herself. The are any number of reasons.
yes all these possibilities exist apart from the probably that she was threatened
Prosecutors recommended against charging Gaetz months ago because of witness credibility issues.
The problem isn't about her suddenly and mysteriously refusing to cooperate. It's that she's likely to get torn apart with little weight given to her evidence, and the other key witness is a criminal whose credibility will be easy for defence attorneys to attack.
Maybe she was threatened, who knows, but it's no secret that there's nothing more thankless than being a witness to a sexual crimes trial.
Originally posted by Smurph
Prosecutors recommended against charging Gaetz months ago because of witness credibility issues.The problem isn't about her suddenly and mysteriously refusing to cooperate. It's that she's likely to get torn apart with little weight given to her evidence, and the other key witness is a criminal whose credibility will be easy for defence attorneys to attack.
Maybe she was threatened, who knows, but it's no secret that there's nothing more thankless than being a witness to a sexual crimes trial.
It has everything to do with it. The witness is the victim in this case. Credibility is an issue, because she accepted money and substances in exchange for sex, and the defense will use that in an attempt to discredit her—even though she was a minor who was trafficked to another country to have sex with a politician. If she does not cooperate, then they do not even have her word against his.
Originally posted by Adam_PoEIf she lacks credibility, then cooperation isn't the issue.
It has everything to do with it. The witness is the victim in this case. Credibility is an issue, because she accepted money and substances in exchange for sex, and the defense will use that in an attempt to discredit her—even though she was a minor who was trafficked to another country to have sex with a politician. If she does not cooperate, then they do not even have her word against his.
Particularly on a criminal standard of proof.
Originally posted by Smurph
If she lacks credibility, then cooperation isn't the issue.Particularly on a criminal standard of proof.
Cooperation is a precedent to credibility. If she refuses to testify, then the reliability of her testimony cannot even be examined.
Her credibility is in question insofar as it is for any sexual assualt victim. The defense will argue that because she was under the influence of substances that the perpetrator provided, that her recollection of events is not reliable. Never mind that he necessarily would have had to traffick her and provide her with the substances for that to be the case.
She could be a credible witness if she was prepared for cross-examination, but that requires her cooperation.
House Ethics Committee Restarts Gaetz Sex Probe
The House Ethics Committee restarting the investigation into Representative Matt Gaetz is the latest legal problem for the controversial Florida Republican. The panel has not decided whether to move ahead with a special investigative subcommittee. That would require a vote by the Ethics Committee members and would be publicly disclosed.
But committee investigators have been looking into the allegations surrounding the fourth-term lawmaker. The Justice Department told Gaetz's lawyers earlier this year that he would not be charged in a federal sex trafficking investigation involving underage girls. Since the DOJ did not charge Gaetz, and is no longer scrutinizing him, the Ethics Committee is free to conduct its own investigation.
House Ethics Panel Reopens Probe Into Matt Gaetz
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The House Ethics Committee restarting the investigation into Representative Matt Gaetz is the latest legal problem for the controversial Florida Republican. The panel has not decided whether to move ahead with a special investigative subcommittee. That would require a vote by the Ethics Committee members and would be publicly disclosed.But committee investigators have been looking into the allegations surrounding the fourth-term lawmaker. The Justice Department told Gaetz's lawyers earlier this year that he would not be charged in a federal sex trafficking investigation involving underage girls. Since the DOJ did not charge Gaetz, and is no longer scrutinizing him, the Ethics Committee is free to conduct its own investigation.
Investigators from the House Ethics Committee have begun reaching out to witnesses as part of a recently revived investigation into Republican Representative Matt Gaetz of Florida, focused on allegations that he may have engaged in sexual misconduct, illicit drug use, and other misconduct.
At least one witness in Florida said they have spoken to investigators about the Republican congressman in recent weeks about lobbying violations, and sources familiar with the Ethics Committee probe say other witnesses also have been contacted.
A source familiar with the House panel's work said that the Justice Department's decision not to bring charges against Gaetz does not impact what the committee will and will not investigate.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Be very literal. Only answer the question that was asked, using as few words as possible.
Adam...
You realize you were talking to a litigator, right?
Ergo you are doing the exact same thing as your dreaded conspiracy theorists in pulling rank on an expert in his own field.
McCarthy has come out and said that Matt Gaetz put in the vote of no confidence, because he refused to help squash the still ongoing Matt Gaetz ethics investigation regarding allegations of sexual misconduct, illicit drug use and campaign finance violations as well as taking bribes.
If Republicans had cut Gaetz out like the tumor he is back in 2021, they wouldn't be in predicament they are now. They did threaten to expel him on Oct 2nd, but he called their bluff.
They're all deplorables.