Judge Moore Ping!
Want on or off this ping list? Just drop me a FReep mail.
Nice roundup of the accusers and Judge Moore's responses.
Follow Judge Moore on Twitter.
Posted on 11/17/2017 8:05:09 PM PST by lasereye
Gloria Allred, the attorney for Roy Moore accuser Beverly Young Nelson, says she won’t permit an inspection of her client’s high school yearbook unless the Senate conducts a hearing on Nelson’ charge that Moore tried to rape her. The yearbook is important because Nelson and Allred presented it as evidence that Moore knew Nelson and had a romantic interest in her.
Moore’s camp has provided reason to believe that he did not sign Nelson’s yearbook. The lawyer for his campaign notes that Moore presided over Nelson’s divorce case in 1999. He says Moore’s clerk stamped the divorce papers with the judge’s signature and added her initials — “DA.”
Those same initials appear by Moore’s name in the yearbook inscription Nelson and Allred adduced, even though Moore was not a DA at the time in question. In addition, the “7s” that appear in the date near the signature appear to be written differently from those that appear elsewhere in the inscription. The inference is that Nelson doctored the yearbook.
To test this theory, Moore’s camp has asked that the yearbook be produced so its handwriting expert can examine it. Among others things, an examination might reveal whether the ink used for the signature dates back to the period when Nelson was a teenager, as opposed to when she became a divorcee.
If Nelson did not doctor the yearbook, she should be eager to have it inspected in order to refute Moore’s claim, backed by evidence, that he did not sign the yearbook. In addition, production of the yearbook would clearly help the voters of Alabama get at the truth.
But Allred is stonewalling. To be sure, she hasn’t flatly refused to produce the yearbook. However, she has set an impossible condition for its production before the Alabama Senate election.
That condition, as noted, is a Senate hearing on allegations against Moore. The Senate isn’t going to hold a hearing about the conduct of a mere candidate, and Allred knows it.
By withholding the yearbook at least until after the election, she increases the likelihood that Moore will lose. This, I suspect, is one of her purposes — and her client’s, as well.
Allred isn’t just stonewalling on production of the yearbook. In her television appearances, she won’t say that the signature on the yearbook is Moore’s. She won’t even say whether Moore presided over Nelson’s divorce.
Here, for what it’s worth, is what I suspect happened. Moore did write a note in Nelson’s yearbook, but did not sign it (a prudent decision). When Nelson decided to accuse Moore of rape, she added Moore’s signature, using her divorce paper.
Allred now realizes that her client committed a huge blunder — one that undermines, if not destroys, her credibility. Hence, the stonewalling.
Allred is banking on Moore withdrawing from the race or losing it. In that case, there won’t be a Senate hearing — the condition she set for producing the yearbook.
Moore, though, may sue Nelson. In that event, it’s possible that Nelson might have to produce the yearbook. There’s nothing Allred can do about this, but she can prevent the hole Nelson has dug from getting deeper. To claim, at this juncture, that Moore signed the yearbook would, if my suspicion is correct, deepen the hole.
Assuming that Nelson doctored the yearbook, does this mean her allegation of attempted rape is false? No. But it does seriously damage the case for believing this allegation.
If Nelson “embellished” Moore’s yearbook inscription, we should have little confidence that she hasn’t embellished her story of what transpired between the two.
To be sure, other serious allegations have been lodged against Moore by other women. They provide Alabamans with plenty of reason not to want to vote for him.
But I wonder whether, if Nelson is shown to have doctored the yearbook, Alabama voters will see Moore as a victim and choose to credit him over those who are making the most serious allegations.
Game over—Thank you for playing.
It’s official — signature is fake.
She said she got her book about a month after she turned 16 on Nov 14 1977. Does that make sense since the 1977 school year ended 5 months earlier.
She says he was such an important person...but he wasn't even appointed Deputy District Attorney until October of 1977.
About the "supposed" bruises on her neck....They would have been on the back of her neck. She said she covered them with makeup. Why??....she had long red hair.
So many lies.
Or did she know in advance and is part of the conspiracy/subterfuge?
Bookmark
LOL - The writer of this piece assumes that Moore wrote the entry in the yearbook but wisely did not sign it and only years later the woman added Moore’s forged signature and other identifying data. That’s even more far fetched than Allred’s statement that all the writing on the page was Moore’s. You can’t make this stuff up!
TILT....insert another quarter, er I mean, bimbo.
Want on or off this ping list? Just drop me a FReep mail.
Nice roundup of the accusers and Judge Moore's responses.
Follow Judge Moore on Twitter.
She was voluntarily blindsided.
Sue both those bishes.
Discovery will be entertaining.
And Allred loses her law license.
According to the President Clinton Rule, accusations of sexual misconduct are irrelevant.
Are you saying she was taken by surprise but has “voluntarily” gone along with it for the sake of mammon, fame, her reputation, something. Obviously she wouldn’t be the first attorney with a nasty surprise or more; the cleverest ones use their lawyerly tricks and roll right along. Am I on the right track?
Yeah that was a bit strange. It is interesting to see how people think .. or not think. Whoever wrote the note likely signed their name as Roy as the note and Roy are in the handwriting and ink. What was added in a different ink and handwriting was last name Moore, DA, date and location.
The yearbook evidence means nothing. Even if you somehow explain away the different ink and handwriting they can't prove Roy signed it and it wasn't forged. So we have a stand-off and a he said / she said. The voters have to decide.
Allred is intentionally not asking detailed questions to Beverly Young Nelson about the yearbook. Maybe Beverly did, or had someone do, the forgery/modification —- or maybe she didn’t. The person to ask would be the person/group that is paying Gloria Allred’s fees and Beverly’s expenses. And that paymaster/arranger is NOT BEVERLY
“It’s evidence?”
Yes, it certainly is evidence.
Evidence that Gloria Allred should be disbarred.
Well...bye, Gloria.
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.