Connect with us

Culture and Religion

Sorry USA Today: There is a reason why hearsay evidence is inadmissible



Sorry USA Today There is a reason why hearsay evidence is inadmissible

The Culture of Liberty means nothing if not applied equally to everyone – even political opponents.

The latest in the confirmation smear saga is that USA today has reported that ‘Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford offers Senate four people who corroborate her assault claims’

The problem with that misleading headline is that these were cases where she related the story of the alleged assault decades later. It should be obvious why this kind of hearsay evidence is inadmissible in court. If the Left had been able to present any credible evidence, it would have done so by now. Instead they have this up, dredged up trying to present hearsay evidence long after the fact as ‘proof’.

Do we really want to have cases begin without any legal protections for the accused?

In their zeal to win at all costs, the Left has taken up the talking point that the limitations in prosecutions do not apply in this case. As has been the situation for the past several days, this was exemplified by Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) that “this is not a criminal trial” with regards to the presumption of innocence. It is the culture of Liberty that protects the accused and the rules of evidence that supposedly aren’t applicable in this case.  Most of the Left has taken up this talking point of what they think is a little loophole in liberty. Does anyone see the danger in this ‘logic’ being used in other cases?

The contention is that outside a criminal case, the normal rules of evidence and protection of the innocence do not apply. Presumably these would then be employed if an investigation turned up criminal wrongdoing. The problem is that at that point it would be too late – the suspect would have been convicted in the court of public opinion with these perversions of justice.

Equality means equality before the law – everywhere.

There is a reason these rules apply across the board, not just in criminal court. Just as other vestiges of liberty need to be present in all aspects of society. We cannot have cutouts and exceptions for the convenience of certain cases or situations. If Liberty means anything, it has to apply to every situation and everywhere or it is a meaningless concept.

For once we go down the road of making exceptions in freedom for certain situations, they will expand to negate the concept. Is that really worth the effort in defeating one man for the nation’s highest court?