Be Patient With Kavanaugh

For the past two weeks, the American media has been saturated with news of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s sexual assault allegation against Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump’s nominee for Supreme Court Justice. Americans are split on who they believe, with an NPR poll finding that 45 percent side with Ford, 33 percent with Kavanaugh and another 22 remain percent unsure. It is totally fine to analyze each testimony and attempt to figure out whether Kavanaugh or Ford is lying. The danger comes when we allow our judgments and conclusions about what still remains an unconfirmed accusation to affect how we think about the legal ramifications of this allegation. Some people, mainly Democrats, already believe Kavanaugh should not be confirmed based on this accusation and his behavior during the Senate hearing. On the other side, there are those, mainly Republicans, who have decided that there is no need for an FBI investigation. Many people don’t believe Ford, even though she has met the criteria of a credible witness by not changing her story throughout the entirety of her testimony. Thus we have two stories, neither of which can be proven true, and we have citizens who want to base the government’s next steps off of the little we have heard.

The most ridiculous argument made to prove Kavanaugh’s guilt has come from the Democratic side. Some say that Kavanaugh’s anxiety, frustration and poor composure are signs of guilt. Most of us are not psychologists, but I would think it a reasonable assumption that both a guilty and innocent person could act agitated when confronted by an allegation of sexual assault. If Kavanaugh is innocent, I cannot imagine the amount of fear he would be feeling, being questioned in front of the entire country.

This is not to say we should not be concerned about how Kavanaugh will handle himself on the bench based on his clear inability to hold himself together under pressure. But, we cannot rely on our hunches and opinions when judging a relatively vague case, due to the lack of hard evidence. If anything, Kavanaugh’s mistakes in his testimony regarding the federal drinking age at the time of the party and his own age at the time of the party should disqualify him from the nomination.

Similarly, there are nonsensical arguments coming from the right about how we already know Ford is lying. Some claim that the statements made from Kavanaugh’s high school friends and past girlfriends, who would most likely want to protect him, that shine a positive light on Kavanaugh, indicate that Ford is making all of this up. This is a contrived mindset. There is no concrete reason to discredit Dr. Ford. Even if this is the first time she has come forward with this accusation, it is not uncommon for victims of sexual assault to never tell anyone about their experience. Thus we cannot truly discredit Ford’s testimony.

The trouble with all of this is that we are making our judgments off of character assessments. Whether or not you disagree with his political views, it is undeniable that Kavanaugh has led a respectable public life and that his behavior throughout his professional career does not correspond with the stereotypical profile of someone who commits sexual assaults. But it is also undeniable that, short of being involved in a conspiracy (which may be possible), Ford would have no reason to lie about this experience. Yet neither of these conclusions can tell us who is telling the truth with no hard evidence to substantiate either claim. So, if we want to remain fair, as we ought, there is no way that we can decide it is the time to make a permanent legal decision based on 'he said, she said.'