In such a case, the law permits the person to show, as a way to corroborate her testimony, that she told others the same story long before she supposedly fabricated the story. The evidentiary principle of “prior consistent statement” as corroborative evidence is especially pertinent in the case of Christine Ford.
In 2012, Christine Ford told her therapist that she had suffered an assault by students from “an elitist boys’ school” who went on to become “highly respected and high-ranking member of society in Washington.” The therapist has written notes that confirm that Ford made that statement in 2012.
Republican prosecutor Rachel Mitchell, who will be questioning Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford, prepares prior to a Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing for U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh on Capitol Hill on Thu., Sept. 27, 2018. Reuters.
Ford, offering measured testimony that was at times emotional -- her voice cracked as she detailed the allegations and how the assault affected her afterward -- laid out the alleged assault that she says happened at a suburban home in the D.C. area when she was 15 and Kavanaugh 17.
Ford's attorneys said in their letter that they would not produce their client's medical records because they contain "private, highly sensitive information that is not necessary for the committee to assess the credibility of her testimony.".
Results of a polygraph test taken by Judge Brett Kavanaugh accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, indicate her responses to the two questions asked of her about her sexual assault allegations against him to be "not indicative of deception," according to the report on the polygraph .
Hanafin said that when he first met Ford, she was nervous, like most people who take polygraphs are. He added that it was an "unremarkable" test, which is standard. He also acknowledged that regardless of the results, there is "a certain segment that'll just say this is just junk science.".
Jerry Hanafin, who conducted the polygraph test, told CBS News' Ed O'Keefe that it was unlikely that in her response, Ford believed something that was not true, and passed the test because she believed it was true. Hanafin said that when he first met Ford, she was nervous, like most people who take polygraphs are. He added that it was an "unremarkable" test, which is standard.
The results were sent to counsel for the Senate Judiciary Committee by Ford's attorneys in advance of Thursday's hearing, when both Kavanaugh and Ford will testify about the allegations.
Since Ford's allegation surfaced, two other women, Deborah Ramirez and Julie Swetnick, have made accusations against Kavanaugh.
The polygraph test was administered on August 7, one week after she wrote a letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein detailing her story of the assault. For the test, Ford gave her account, in which she alleges that when they were both in high school, Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed during a party and groped her, trying to remove her clothing.
Christine Blasey Ford is sworn in to testify at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, Sept. 27, 2018. CBS News
Ford testimony concludes, ahead of Kavanaugh's. Ford's testimony wrapped up at roughly 2:14 p.m., after roughly four hours of testimony, not including breaks. Kavanaugh is expected to testify later.
Rachel Mitchell, a career prosecutor with decades of experience prosecuting sex crimes, comes from the Maricopa County Attorney's Office in Phoenix, Arizona where she heads the Special Victims Division, which covers sex crimes and family violence.
Kavanaugh & Ford hearing 07:12. Christine Blasey Ford -- in testimony that left the hearing room silent for much of four hours -- told the Senate Judiciary Committee she is "100 percent" certain Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh assaulted her when they were in high school. Ford, offering measured testimony that was at times emotional -- her ...
Grassley gaveled in at 10:05 a.m. to begin his opening statements. He apologized directly to both Ford and Kavanaugh, saying they and their families have been through a "terrible couple of weeks."
In her first public appearance since coming forward with allegations against Kavanaugh, accuser Julie Swetnick told "The Circus" that she came forward so close to the hearing because it's been on her mind ever since her claim of assault occurred.
Ford explained how one of the most impressing memories from the night of her alleged assault was the laughter shared between Judge and Kavanaugh.
Ford’s prior consistent statements to her three friends, her husband, and her therapist, are obviously critically important corroborative evidence because they tend to show that she hasn’t recently fabricated her story , as President Trump and others are now asserting. Equally important, the fact that she made the prior consistent statements prior to Kennedy’s resignation and Kavanaugh’s nomination serves to reinforce the truthfulness of her testimony.
Under the law, the statement that Ford made to Gildo-Mazzon constitutes corroborating evidence that buttresses Ford’s accusation against Kavanaugh. That’s because it is a “prior consistent statement,” one that was made even before Kennedy resigned and before Kavanaugh was nominated and, for that matter, before Donald Trump even became president.
The corroborating evidence is what the law calls a “prior consistent statement.” This is a statement that a person makes prior to the incident in question that is consistent with her version of the events. Prior consistent statements become especially pertinent when a witness in a case is accused of fabricating a story. In such a case, the law permits the person to show, as a way to corroborate her testimony, that she told others the same story long before she supposedly fabricated the story.
White’s sworn affidavit setting forth this fact was in the hands of the Senate Judiciary Committee prior to its rushed confirmation vote last Saturday.
Asked about the affidavits last week, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said the people didn’t really have corroborating information. “Those are not people who witnessed the alleged event,” he said.
In 1998, the year that Cornyn gave up his seat on the Texas Supreme Court to become the state’s attorney general, the Texas Second Court of Appeals, issued an opinion in the case of Bolden v. State, which stated in pertinent part as follows:
In 1995 , when Cornyn was serving as a justice on the Texas Supreme Court, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case of Tome v. United States, where the court’s opinion stated in part as follows: