When You Think About It: DUE PROCESS

F LoBuono

DUE PROCESS OF LAW

noun

1. the regular administration of the law, according to which no citizen maybe denied his or her legal rights and all laws must conform to fundamental, accepted legal principles, as the right of the accused to confront his or her accusers.

Of course, like most Americans, I have a keen interest in the confirmation process of Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh. What seemed like a lock for him to be confirmed now has been brought into question with the charge of an alleged sexual assault committed when he was a teenager by college professor Christine Blasey Ford. Dr. Ford claims that Judge Kavanaugh groped and tried to remove her clothes without her permission at a high school party. Kavanaugh has vehemently denied the charges.

The fact that these allegations were brought to light after nearly 40 years had transpired has led many to cry foul, claiming political cronyism. The Republican controlled confirmation committee wants Kavanaugh appointed ASAP while the Democrats want the decision at least delayed until the allegations can be further investigated (if not have his nomination removed completely).

Many of Judge Kavanaugh's supporters are using a two-pronged defense:

1. The obvious - he simply did not do it (as he claims).

2. If he did do the deed, because youth was involved and so much time has passed, the charge should be passed off as "youthful indiscretion".

His detractors counter that why should his word be simply accepted over hers? And, "youthful indiscretion" is NO excuse for aberrant behavior at ANY time, especially for someone who will sitting on the highest court in the land.

That is why most reasonable people say, let's hear what BOTH of them have to say in an impartial setting where the truth may be ascertained. The caveat has been in the definition of impartial.

Before I go any further, I would like to make one thing perfectly clear: I condemn sexual violence of ANY nature at ANY time, practiced by ANYONE. I have never forced myself on a woman and denounce any who has/does. And, furthermore, EVERY report of sexual abuse MUST be taken seriously, no matter when it may have occurred.

Now, this debate is not new: The He Said - She Said conundrum has raged since Adam and Eve. To deal with this, jurists adopted the legal principal of DUE PROCESS OF LAW. I included the Webster definition of it at the beginning of this post. The purpose is obvious; one person's word should not carry more weight than the others and the PROCESS is designed to allow evidence, rather than hearsay, to carry the day. It should be simple and effective.

If we pursue the process with equal vigor used in finding the TRUTH, we eliminate the second guessing that plaque inquiries that do not follow it to completion.

That's why I am distressed with those, on both sides, who fall prey to knee-jerk reactions and political pandering. We should not put more credence on one person's account over the other's without EVIDENCE to support one or the other claim! The only way to KNOW is to INVESTIGATE. And, that investigation must be thorough, aggressive and NON BIASED. And, the only way to accomplish this is with complete TRANSPARENCY. It is the only way to the truth.

So, follow the process - completely. Allow Dr. Ford to testify in front of a non-biased panel (if that is even possible) to tell us what happened to her and see the evidence to either support or negate her claim. Of course, as is the LAW, Judge Kavanaugh MUST have the equal opportunity to present his case.

It may not be a perfect process, especially since women seem to bare the most burden of proof, but, in an imperfect world, it is an honest attempt to seek the truth - the ultimate goal for all of us.