Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Clinton's client (1975 Hillary defends rapist of 12 yr old)
Politico.com ^ | February 24, 2008 | Ben Smith

Posted on 02/26/2008 6:01:21 AM PST by TexasCajun

Newsday's Glenn Thrush has that rarest of things: A new chapter to the Hillary's biography, and one that cuts sharply against a central part of her image: that she's spent her whole career fighting for children:

[T]here is a little-known episode Clinton doesn't mention in her standard campaign speech in which those two principles collided. 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.

[snip]

[Clinton's] account leaves out a significant aspect of her defense strategy — attempting to impugn the credibility of the victim, according to a Newsday examination of court and investigative files and interviews with witnesses, law enforcement officials and the victim.

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.

Clinton's aides point out, accurately, that she was bound to present her indigent client the best defense available, which she did: He was able to plead down to a much lesser offense.

But read the whole story. Thrush reconstructs the crime, Clinton's role as a legal "bulldog," and her defense through court and police documents, and interviews a range of parties, including the alleged victim.

It's really an astonishingly good piece of reporting.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: democratparty; elections; hillary; hillaryclinton; rape
Seems Slick wasn't the first rapist Hillary defended.
1 posted on 02/26/2008 6:01:24 AM PST by TexasCajun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

Let’s hope the good people of OH and TX send them back to Chappaqua.


2 posted on 02/26/2008 6:05:15 AM PST by Red in Blue PA (Truth : Liberals :: Kryptonite : Superman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA
send them back to Chappaqua

Hades, or Arkansas, please.

3 posted on 02/26/2008 6:06:32 AM PST by NativeNewYorker (Freepin' Jew Boy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker

NY voted her in.....they deserve her.

(Sorry to you)


4 posted on 02/26/2008 6:07:17 AM PST by Red in Blue PA (Truth : Liberals :: Kryptonite : Superman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

Don’t misunderstand me, I dislike Hillary as much as any conservative. However, if she was appointed by the court to defend this individual, she owed him her best effort.


5 posted on 02/26/2008 6:07:42 AM PST by scooter2 (The greatest threat to the security of the United States is the Democratic Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun
Before that, she was fighting to release the torture-murderers of Alex Rackley in New Haven, when she wasn't in Oakland fighting to save the Black Panther terrorists who murdered Betty Van Patten and ruled their ghetto with intimidation and violence.

Fighting for children, my ass.

6 posted on 02/26/2008 6:08:50 AM PST by Jim Noble (I've got a home in Glory Land that outshines the sun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

Well, if they both stay in Westchester....


7 posted on 02/26/2008 6:09:03 AM PST by NativeNewYorker (Freepin' Jew Boy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

Regardless of what one thinks of H! or lawyers in general, a lawyer is supposed to defend the client vigorously, no matter what the charges are.........


8 posted on 02/26/2008 6:09:13 AM PST by Red Badger ( We don't have science, but we do have consensus.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: scooter2
Absolutely correct. She did her job and she did it well.
9 posted on 02/26/2008 6:09:52 AM PST by svcw (The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: scooter2
...if she was appointed by the court to defend this individual, she owed him her best effort....

And if a Republican had done this, he or she would be literally crucified in the press.

No mercy.

10 posted on 02/26/2008 6:10:27 AM PST by NativeNewYorker (Freepin' Jew Boy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

There is plenty of slime in Hillary’s background, but this isn’t. She was court appointed to represent the defendant. What else was she supposed to do?


11 posted on 02/26/2008 6:11:00 AM PST by dinoparty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun
Clinton's aides point out, accurately, that she was bound to present her indigent client the best defense available, which she did: He was able to plead down to a much lesser offense.

Public defenders cannot refuse to take a case on moral or ethical grounds?
12 posted on 02/26/2008 6:12:05 AM PST by elizabetty (Mike Huckabee is such a loser he does not even recognized he lost a long time ago.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
"Regardless of what one thinks of H! or lawyers in general, a lawyer is supposed to defend the client vigorously, no matter what the charges are........."

I was under the impression that "defend" in this context meant to ensure that your client received a fair trial and that his or her constitutional rights were not violated in the process. It seems that most defense attorneys nowadays define the word as meaning "getting my client off scot-free" regardless of the charges.
13 posted on 02/26/2008 6:14:05 AM PST by FortWorthPatriot (No better friend, no worse enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

If Kenneth Starr was a “ Big Tobacco Lawyer “ then Hillary is a “Child Rapist Lawyer “.


14 posted on 02/26/2008 6:16:27 AM PST by Inwoodian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #15 Removed by Moderator

To: FortWorthPatriot

Are you suggesting that the creedibility of the accuser is not relevant to the dertermination of guilt?


16 posted on 02/26/2008 6:18:08 AM PST by dinoparty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

This sort of attack on a politician never works anyway. Bring on the issues that are important today.


17 posted on 02/26/2008 6:18:39 AM PST by cripplecreek (Voting CONSERVATIVE in memory of 5 children killed by illegals 2/17/08 and 2/19/ 08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: svcw

She did her job and she did it well.

____________________________________________

Did she? I followed the links. Doesn’t say if she won or lost the case.


18 posted on 02/26/2008 6:18:44 AM PST by Responsibility2nd (John McCain. 2008ís version of Bob Dole.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: elizabetty

I don’t think so. If that were the case, it would be nearly impossible to find an attorney who would be willing to take the case.


19 posted on 02/26/2008 6:19:54 AM PST by dinoparty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

I got this as an email today.

THIS WILL OPEN YOUR EYES!

By Paul Harvey

Conveniently Forgotten Facts.

Back in 1969 a group of Black Panthers decided that a fellow black panther named Alex Rackley needed to die.

Rackley was suspected of disloyalty. Rackley was first tied to a
chair.Once safely immobilized, his friends tortured him for hours by,
Among other things, pouring boiling water on him.  When they got tired
of torturing Rackley, Black Panther member, Warren Kimbo
took Rackley outside and put a bullet in his head. Rackley’s body was later found floating in a river about 25
miles North of New Haven, Connecticut.

Perhaps at this point you’re curious as to what happened to these
Black Panthers? In 1977, that’s only eight years later, only one of
the killers
was still in jail. The shooter, Warren Kimbro, managed to get a
scholarship to Harvard and became good friends with none other
than Al Gore. He later became an assistant dean at a Connecticut
State College. Isn’t that something? As a ‘60s Radical you can
pump a bullet into someone’s head and a few years later, in the
same state, you can become an assistant college dean! Only in America!

Erica Higgins was the woman who served the Panthers by boiling the
water for Mr.. Rackley’s torture. Some years later Ms. Huggins was
elected to a California School Board.

How in the world do you think these killers got off so easy? Maybe it was in some part due to the efforts of two people who came to the
defense of the Panthers. These two people actually went so far as to
shut down Yale University with demonstrations in defense of the
accused Black Panthers during their trial. One of these people was none
other than Bill Lan Lee.

Mr.. Lee, or Mr.. Lan Lee, as the case may be, isn’t a college dean. He
isn’t a member of a California School Board. He is now head of the
United States Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, appointed by
none other than Bill Clinton.

O.K., so who was the other Panther defender? Is this other notable
Panther defender now a school board member? Is this other Panther
Apologist now an assistant college dean? No, neither!

The other Panther defender was, like Lee, a radical law student at
Yale University at the time. She is now known as the “smartest woman
in The
world.” She is none other than the Democratic Senator from the
State of New York —— our former First Lady, the Incredible
Hillary Rodham Clinton.

And now, as Paul Harvey said; “You know the rest of the story”.

This deserves the widest possible press. (where is our press???)

REMEMBER, “Hillary Rodham Clinton” IS RUNNING FOR THE PRESIDENT OF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

This is proven right by SNOPES.COM


20 posted on 02/26/2008 6:21:57 AM PST by goodwithagun (My gun has killed less people than Ted Kennedy's car.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

So 32 years ago, she did her job as a court appointed lawyer.

Off with her head.


21 posted on 02/26/2008 6:22:32 AM PST by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: scooter2

By law she may have owed him her best. When she stands before the Great Throne, that will not suffice for what she did.


22 posted on 02/26/2008 6:23:00 AM PST by bboop (Stealth Tutor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: svcw; scooter2
No, I heartily disagree. A vigorous defense used to mean ensuring the system did not grind up your client by violating their rights and, if a guilty verdict was rendered, ensuring the sentence was fair and proportional. I'm not sure when it morphed into use every trick in and outside the book to aid the client in escaping justice while trashing the victim and putting criminals back in our midst. The latter will lead to the ultimate collapse of the system.

Officer of the Court, indeed. Bovine Feces, Mrs. C. I wonder if your client struck again?

23 posted on 02/26/2008 6:23:06 AM PST by NonValueAdded (Who Would Montgomery Brewster Choose?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #24 Removed by Moderator

To: Responsibility2nd

Doesn’t say if she won or lost the case.
__________________________________________________

He was able to plead down to a much lesser offense.

Probably something like ...He was in the same state as his victim at the time of the rape


25 posted on 02/26/2008 6:23:52 AM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: dinoparty

What else could she have done? If she’d had any character at all, she would have either refused this case or made sure the guy pled guilty.

Right. Wrong. It’s binary. Don’t forget, Hitler’s guys followed the law and did their best.


26 posted on 02/26/2008 6:24:28 AM PST by bboop (Stealth Tutor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker

Who knows where they’re from ?


27 posted on 02/26/2008 6:27:07 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks (ENERGY CRISIS made in Washington D. C.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun
"He was able to plead down to a much lesser offense."

That tells me right there he really was guilty. Hillary doesn't even mind destroying a child for her own benefit. I don't know what the heck kind of "child development background" two bit lawyer like Herself could have, but I know my own child development background and wonder whatever happened to the girl.

28 posted on 02/26/2008 6:27:35 AM PST by cake_crumb (Don't vote Romney in your primary unless you WANT his delegates to go to McCain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker

Come on, Arkansas is a nice place.


29 posted on 02/26/2008 6:30:00 AM PST by demshateGod (the GOP is dead to me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #30 Removed by Moderator

To: cripplecreek
I am glad that I am not the only one that thinks along the line of what Hillary did, as being nothing more than her doing her job. I am by NO MEANS a supporter of hers, but I also know that these dug up, blown out of proportion, tid bits are what make me sick to read anything from the media til after November. Who knows......GOD forbid, but if she gets elected, maybe these skills of hers will keep her a step ahead of our enemies.
31 posted on 02/26/2008 6:37:03 AM PST by Wavrnr10 (Eagles soar but weasels don't get sucked in jet engines)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: bboop

So getting a fair trial is wrong?


32 posted on 02/26/2008 6:40:15 AM PST by Augustinian monk (Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin - Romans 4:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Do you even know what the heck you are talking about?


33 posted on 02/26/2008 6:42:36 AM PST by ReluctantDragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

It’s not a defense attorney’s job to help the prosecution. I’ll give her a pass on this one (but only on this one).


34 posted on 02/26/2008 6:44:18 AM PST by jalisco555 ("My 80% friend is not my 20% enemy" - Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded
No, I heartily disagree. A vigorous defense used to mean ensuring the system did not grind up your client by violating their rights and, if a guilty verdict was rendered, ensuring the sentence was fair and proportional. I'm not sure when it morphed into use every trick in and outside the book to aid the client in escaping justice while trashing the victim and putting criminals back in our midst. The latter will lead to the ultimate collapse of the system.

I agree. I have made this type of statement many times. However, the case in question was kind of complicated. The girl willingly jumped in a truck and went off drinking and driving with some people. She apparently wanted to have sex with one of the participants, but not the defendant, and she and her mother apparently doctored her story. It was not the slam-dunk case implied in the title and introduction.

35 posted on 02/26/2008 6:47:04 AM PST by Sans-Culotte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: goodwithagun

it is proven FALSE by Snopes...Snopes even calls out the fact that the sender of the email is hoping most readers WON’T check out their site and will just take it at face value...

http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/panthers.asp


36 posted on 02/26/2008 6:47:53 AM PST by Zeppelin (Keep on FReepin' on...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: bboop

I understand where you are coming from, but you have to understand that our entire criminal justice system stands or falls based on the defendant getting adequate representation. Without it, you might as well let the prosecutors just tell the judge who is guilty and what kind of sentence they should get, and forget about trials. When attorneys are appointed to defend someone, it is because nobody else wants to do it.


37 posted on 02/26/2008 7:17:06 AM PST by dinoparty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: dinoparty
"Are you suggesting that the creedibility of the accuser is not relevant to the dertermination of guilt?"

No, I am not. Certainly the credibility of the accuser should be taken into consideration. I suppose I was just venting my frustrations - I had the O.J. trial fiasco on my mind when I posted.
38 posted on 02/26/2008 7:43:35 AM PST by FortWorthPatriot (No better friend, no worse enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun
Read between the lines and you will notice that in all probability, HRC filed a false affidavit, that she knew to be false, when she filed the affidavit alleging that the 12-year-old often sought out older men.

Note too, that during the impeachment the use of affidavits to silence or squelch stories was frequent.

39 posted on 02/26/2008 7:44:28 AM PST by ikka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun
So, was this guy ever accused or convincted of rape after this?
40 posted on 02/26/2008 9:55:06 AM PST by Question_Assumptions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dmz
So 32 years ago, she did her job as a court appointed lawyer. Off with her head.

Sounds about right. No, seriously, she keeps blabbing about 35 years of experience, so it is perfectly legitimate to point out what that vaunted experience means, especially for the woman who does everything for "the children". Not "off with her head" but it's worth noting just one more example of hypocrisy in this woman's already Olympian record of lies.

BTW, for those who are mentioning that she was just a lawyer doing her job: I have been court appointed attorney in about 20 cases, mostly minor stuff. Once, I was sent a notice of appointment by the assignment judge. I reviewed the facts in the file: the State child welfare agency proposed terminating my client's parental rights to the 11 children she had in 13 years by 7 different men. The allegations included children found with cigarette burns, babies left in the same diaper so long they needed hospitalization, beatings of every kind, neglect, drug abuse, etc. They asked me to defend her right to continue to be their mother. I wrote back to the judge and said words to the effect that, in all honesty, I cannot represent this person, because my conscience could not abide the record of her behavior. I simply could not be an advocate for such a person. I was released without a problem.

There is a great principal of being allowed to mount a defense, but every lawyer has a choice to exercise their conscience or to go along with the phony idea that they have no choice but to represent the scum. Like the OJ case. Not one of those lawyers was there for any great principle. People kidded me at the time: wouldn't you want to take that case and make all that money, etc. I said, I'd like to make the money, but not that way. If I was a high profile defense lawyer and he called me there is no way I would have represented him once I saw the state's evidence.

41 posted on 02/26/2008 1:13:58 PM PST by JewishRighter (Why, oh Why can't it be Hunter???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun
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.

While I am no fan of the fraud that Hillary is, she was a court appointed attorney for the defendant, she, like it or not, was doing her job.

42 posted on 02/26/2008 1:17:12 PM PST by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dinoparty
If that were the case, it would be nearly impossible to find an attorney who would be willing to take the case.

You have a higher opinion of lawyers than do I.
43 posted on 02/26/2008 4:48:39 PM PST by elizabetty (Mike Huckabee is such a loser he does not even recognized he lost a long time ago.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson