-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Tara Reade appears to have lied under oath about her education, defense lawyers seek to get convictions overturned in cases where she testified
- Thread starter infamous5445
- Start date
pretty much any case she testified as an expert witness (or any cases she's been involved in) could review and request records
depending on the specifics of her testimony and how they related to the facts of each case, it could crack open a whole can of worms
I never participated in the discussions about the allegations. She made her claim (which was vastly different from what she said last year) and it should have been investigated as fully as possible. Believing possible victims has always meant to me that they should be taken seriously and their claims should be investigated as much as possible. This fucking sucks. I hope there can be some positive changes on era when it comes to situations like this at least. One of my favorite communities was ripped apart. Sigh.
She may have just used the wrong title. She always described her job as managing interns.
Ahhhh. Anything from Katie Halper and several of the other twitter profiles that were pushing the story?
She's claiming she worked on the Violence Against Women Act.
Believe women means we should take all claims seriously, not just take everything at face value. Unfortunately, many just don't want to accept that Biden is what we've got.
Going to hold my breath on that one. When the story of Biden talking about a kids breast came up she retweeted and quietly deleted when Biden wasn't even at the event. Best to not take those people serious at all.
The NYT article says this:
Ms. Reade also told the court that she was currently a substitute teacher but had worked in domestic violence prevention for more than two decades and testified in more than 20 cases. Her career began, she said, in Mr. Biden's office.
"I was a legislative assistant," she said, according to the testimony. "He worked on the Violence Against Women Act, the federal act."
Staff lists published in 1993 show Ms. Reade listed as a staff assistant, a different position from the legislative assistant job she cited in her testimony. Both titles are common in congressional offices, with legislative assistant indicating a slightly more senior post that involves working on policy. In multiple interviews, Ms. Reade described her duties as managing the interns, never mentioning any direct work on the Violence Against Women Act.
If this is what qualified her to be an expert witness that's really bad and is more than just using the wrong title.
I feel bad for people who will unfortunately be less likely to step up regarding their assaults but this just goes to show that any misinformation when caught, will have serious repercussions.
In the era of fake news, it's nice to see this being a punishable offence, granted I don't think it'll change the mind of many who do believe Biden is an alleged creep and predator.
Which is whatever it is at this point, look at who is the currently appointed president. Seriously though, people on this site really need to stop jumping to conclusions immediately. Even if they are right in the end.
In the era of fake news, it's nice to see this being a punishable offence, granted I don't think it'll change the mind of many who do believe Biden is an alleged creep and predator.
Which is whatever it is at this point, look at who is the currently appointed president. Seriously though, people on this site really need to stop jumping to conclusions immediately. Even if they are right in the end.
User Banned (Permanent): Drive-by trolling, prior bans for trolling, account in junior phase
Lock this thread pls
Well, I guess we got our investigations and holes have been poked in her story re: Biden AND a pattern of pathological lying has been established.
In this case, I don't see how her claim can be taken seriously. In fact, her pathological lying might well put actual rapists back on the street because she posed as an expert.
In this case, I don't see how her claim can be taken seriously. In fact, her pathological lying might well put actual rapists back on the street because she posed as an expert.
Or even suggesting we wait for an investigation or other accusers.
She testified in 20 court cases?!
Oh man, the idea that maybe either innocent people are in jail or abuser/rapists might go free is horrific.
Oh man, the idea that maybe either innocent people are in jail or abuser/rapists might go free is horrific.
This is not a great look and seriously casts a new light on Reade as this is dangerous and reckless behavior. Does it completely invalidate her allegations? I don't know. This is a tricky fucking situation. All that I can confidently assert is that lying as an expert witness is a terrible, terrible thing.
I can only sit and pray this shit isn't true because the consequences of it being accurate are so fucking huge catastrophic. Like Jesus, this is a huge deal.
Yeeeaaaahh, it really feels like there's a pattern here.
And as somebody who once dated a pathological liar for months, let me just say it suuuuuuuuucks.
Yeah I missed that and it was clarified for me earlier in the thread.
The problem is that you make a thread about it, and it gets locked. Discuss it in a thread and you get banned. Apparently folks have emailed mods about it and they're ignored. Where, pray tell, does one bring it up?
You may be right. perhaps this is just a new phase of self-actualization
I don't know, but I don't want this thread locked. It needs to stay up so that everyone can see it.
It's a perfect setup to never address the issue!
Edit: basically Epicurus' trilemma
In situations where the only evidence is one's own testimony, unfortunately, all other people can really ever evaluate you on is your credibility. Serial perjury is difficult to ignore. It's conceivable that the allegations she made are true (though I personally don't think so), but her other actions should realistically preclude her getting the benefit of the doubt.
The allegations obviously prompted this investigation. Job one for reporters (and opposition research, etc., though in this case it's reporters) is drilling down on the people involved and getting all the facts. In a story with stakes this high (literally the fate of the country), no resource would (or should) be spared in trying to get to the bottom of things.
I was disturbed reading the allegation. I was concerned too we had a thread called "Joe Biden Rape Victim".
I'm not trying to slight the moderation, but I felt uncomfortable expressing my opinion on it, in case some people would say I was trying to discredit Reade. When it would be more about seeing it investigated further before writing that title, and waiting for more than the gifs of Biden being touchy-feely as well.
And also if they're not all guilty, some innocents may have been put in jail based on faulty expert testimony.
I don't blame the Mods for the rampant banning that happened when this story broke. Put yourself in their shoes. If you ignore the cries to silence the doubters, you're accused of being soft on rape. Realistically, the odds that Reade was lying about Biden seemed slim. After all, who would lie in such a high-profile way?
Of course, now that we have the benefit of hindsight, we can say Mods were being too swift to ban dissenters. But playing the odds, they erred on the side of standing with the accuser in a situation where accusers are most often being truthful.
Can something be learned from this? Sure. But in the meantime, I'm not going to be too hard on them.
Of course, now that we have the benefit of hindsight, we can say Mods were being too swift to ban dissenters. But playing the odds, they erred on the side of standing with the accuser in a situation where accusers are most often being truthful.
Can something be learned from this? Sure. But in the meantime, I'm not going to be too hard on them.
All of that sounds pretty understandable to me. I'm not saying that people shouldn't comment, or even that they should hesitate to comment because that would just just lead to a chilling effect. It's more that as time has gone on and more of these kinds of cases make their way onto the national stage I personally don't want to comment for a couple of reasons (at least at the outset).
First and foremost, often the accusations are serious both for the accuser and the accused, and have real life implications for them. I don't want to jump on a bandwagon dedicated to lambasting either of them and find out a year later that the individual I was being an asshole to was very likely innocent or correct in their assertions.
Secondly, I don't have any personal knowledge of either party. I know that just because a person behaves in a decent manner around one group of people doesn't mean that they can't be abusive towards another. And even if a person has lied about other things, it doesn't mean they aren't telling the truth about this thing. However, I'd rather give investigative reporters a chance to do their work and start piecing together stories and forming a consensus before firmly forming an opinion.
Even then, sometimes you still won't be able to find out what really happened. It's messy for sure.
Last edited:
should probably also look into reversing some of those bans too if they weren't temporary.
I hadn't heard that.
She lied about so much else like teaching, I thought maybe that one was just a mistake. Guess not!
