I decided to write this legal type post because I am tired of seeing women accusers
and the Left Wing Media passing off Gossip as facts to sway America's voters by
telling tall tales about sexual in counters where allegedly Mr. Trump sexually
attacked these women, or walked in on them while they were dressing. To prove these
stories have no legitimacy and are mere gossip pieces that belong on puff shows like
Wendy and the View, I am going to fill you in on the legal conduct needed to
determine a controversy of this sort, or any case in a US COURT.
First of all, if
these gossip pieces had any merit, Mr. Trump would have been arrested by now, and
have been disqualified by law from his candidacy by America's suffrage Laws. So,
having said this, why are these women and so called legit left WING Media giants
like ABC and the New York Times getting away with passing off gossip alleged sexual
attack stories for legit news? It might be because they have all been coached on how
far they can push gossip without ending up in a real court case for slander and
I don't want to go into the laws of slander and libel here, because this post
would take too long, but suffice it to say that this law has too many loop holes for
people to get away with these kinds of acts. Okay, so let's prove why these attacks
on Mr.Trump are nothing more than alleged gossip laced with hearsay and NO real
facts that would, or can, be admitted into a court of law: First law has a set of
rules for guidance, conduct, and the need to present real hard facts or "EVIDENCE"
to determine guilt and resolve REAL controversies like these alleged Trump sexual
attacks. These rules fall under the area of Facts, Evidence, and LEGAL PROOF. Of
course I can't cover all of the rules in this short piece, but I am going to present
the needed rules that govern the needed facts, or evidence to determine real guilt.
Second, the public, jury, and judges that hear cases, like (if Mr. Trump was really
guilty) these women's accusations, need facts to decide a case, or to see if a law
has been broken, because more often than not all cases are decided on FACTS than on
law. Having said this, I can now point out that the reason these women's charges are
not real legal charges because they are not really presenting hard facts or
evidence, which allows them to spread their alleged gossip stories without having to
defend them in a court of law, which they probably fear.
Before I present the key to
my proof or argument, I should note that all legal books point out that "Law suits,
[or in this case accusations or alleged gossip], "Recollections, documents, and
things relating to past events constitute the 'evidence' on which courts and lawyers
act are are the stuff out which the [real] 'facts' are constructed" (Cohen and
Cohen's Readings in Jurisprudence and Legal Philosophy, Philip Shuchman, 1979,
Little Brown Co.). Without real evidence like the name of the bar, plane, witnesses
to collaborate the story, dates, times, hard evidence for example Mr. Trump's suit
color, etc, there is no case and it becomes gossip. We should note here that
opinions are not accepted in a trial unless it's given by an expert, so again we see
that these alleged stories of sexual attacks against Mr. Trump, have no (according
to law books) validity, or solid evidence being offered in the news stories.
To conclude, although I can't show all of the laws of evidence here, because to do this
I would have to publish its volume here, I think I have shown that the reason all of
these alleged sexual attack encounters, by these women, are being purposely done in
a gossip format is so that NONE of these accusations/charges against Mr. Trump will
end up in court. Although some of these women's stories meet some of these basic
rules, and in many ways do not meet many of the rules evidence, we have to ask
ourselves why is this being done, if they do not meet these rules of evidence?
Here are some of these rules :
(1) Evidence not relevant to the legal issues before the court cannot be received.
(2) Hearsay Evidence cannot be received.. Hearsay is essentially assertions made outside the court.
(3) Testimony in the form of opinions or or conclusions cannot be received, except from experts.
(4) Evidence must be offered in accordance with specified formal and procedural rules (Cohen and Cohen's Readings in Jurisprudence and Legal Philosophy, Philip Shuchman, 1979, Little Brown Co.).
As we can see from these few rules of evidence, some of these rules are being
avoided and ignored in the alleged sexual stories of Mr. Trump. By now, I think we
can see that these rules are evidently being carefully avoided to allegedly give
legitimacy to these ladies' alleged sexual attacks by Mr. Trump.
Still think this
big, well coordinated military like plan of attack is not backed by a group intent
on making sure the Obama/Clinton plan for America is not derailed? America you need
to smarten up; you're being played, and it's working.
Reginaldo Cornejo From Porterville, CA.