Do you think Judge Kavanaugh is guilty or innocent? (anonymous POLL)

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Do you think Judge Kavanaugh is guilty or innocent? (anonymous POLL)

  • Innocent

    Votes: 34 66.7%

  • Guilty

    Votes: 7 13.7%

  • Unsure

    Votes: 10 19.6%
  • Total voters
    51
SpoonJuly said:
Why don't this woman, Ford, file a criminal complaint against the man, and have it brought before a grand jury.
If there is enough evidence, take it to trial.
Until then, we have no right to judge him.
I believe the Bible says something about judging others.
Click to expand...
Ms.Ford cannot do this. The statute of limitations is long expired. And with the proof thus far against her claims, like the supposed witnesses that were there and the named persons state they were not, would even preclude her prevailing in a civil trial. As would the same decades long distance between the offense and now when she's claiming these things occurred.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UnderGrace
Peaceful said:
I see no evidence you are well aware of that process. Reason being, your accusation, 'caught lying'.
Prove it. Keeping in mind, the person or person's claiming in this case Judge Kavanaugh lied has to have proof and be credible.
Click to expand...

Who is reliable here?

The cold, hard facts are that there is no proof one way or the other.

A Justice can’t secure his appointment on the grounds of reasonable doubt. He must be impeccable. Would you, hand over heart, say that he is?
 
Peaceful said:
As does horse manure. The difference in this matter is, horse manure is proof in itself of horse crap.
Whereas the allegations against Judge Kavanaugh are not supported by one scintilla of credible proof.
Click to expand...

Neither is his defense.
 
Jennie-Mae said:
Who is reliable here?

The cold, hard facts are that there is no proof one way or the other.

A Justice can’t secure his appointment on the grounds of reasonable doubt. He must be impeccable. Would you, hand over heart, say that he is?
Click to expand...
Clarence Thomas committed perjury during his hearing. He sits on SCOTUS today and is known as silent Thomas. Because he rarely speaks during court.

The presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard. Kavanaugh is not guilty.
 
Jennie-Mae said:
Who is reliable here?

The cold, hard facts are that there is no proof one way or the other.

A Justice can’t secure his appointment on the grounds of reasonable doubt. He must be impeccable. Would you, hand over heart, say that he is?
Click to expand...

If this is the new standard, we will never have another justice on the court.
There is always someone willing to cause "reasonable doubt".
 
Jennie-Mae said:
Why is the Honorable Mr Brett Kavanugh so important to you?

Why did they stop appointing Protestants to the court?
Click to expand...
Justice is what matters. If this sham is allowed, then justice has totally failed.

I mean just think about....How about I bring up an accusation of (whatever) on you. Should your employer just go ahead and fire you because I said you did whatever to me without any proof or corroboration.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MultilingualMessenger and Peaceful
SpoonJuly said:
To all who have already judged the man guilty, are you ready to suffer the same fate if some accused you tomorrow.
Click to expand...

I’m not saying he is guilty. I’m saying that the standards required by the SCOTUS are being challenged by his candidacy.
 
Peaceful said:
Clarence Thomas committed perjury during his hearing. He sits on SCOTUS today and is known as silent Thomas. Because he rarely speaks during court.

The presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard. Kavanaugh is not guilty.
Click to expand...

You are confusing criminal law with the procedure of appointing Justices.
 
Peaceful said:
A defendant has no Constitutional obligation to proffer a defense. The onus is on the prosecution to prove their case with credible evidence.

How does someone prove a negative?
Click to expand...

I have already answered this.
 
Peaceful said:
I'm not confused in the least. I'm rebutting your use of the terms you've employed in your rebuttal so as to afford their relevance in matters pertaining to the Kavanaugh case.
Click to expand...

But they are irrelevant to his case. It’s not a criminal case.
 
SpoonJuly said:
If this is the new standard, we will never have another justice on the court.
There is always someone willing to cause "reasonable doubt".
Click to expand...
The panel members are each entitled to weigh what's been accused against Judge Kavanaugh and render their decision as to his fitness for court.
What many watchers of these proceedings don't realize is that there are lawmakers who are educated in the law. They're lawyers or attorneys. Therefore, their opinion of the allegations against this man would be reviewed likely under their understanding of law as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back