Friday, March 29, 2024 -
Print Edition

Biden, Kavanaugh: innocent until proven guilty

Is Joe Biden guilty of abuse? The obvious answer is anything but obvious in our hyper-politicized environment: innocent until proven guilty.

Biden and others threw this time-honored standard, which is fundamental to a democratic legal system, out the window during the confirmation of Justice Brett Kavanaugh. But this does not derogate from its truth or relevance.

Biden said during the Kavanaugh hearings that the “presumption” should be that a woman who levels abuse charges is telling the truth. He has now revised this when the charge is leveled against him. But it is neither Biden nor Kavanaugh, neither their accusers nor their defenders, who may suspend “innocent until proven guilty.” The validity of this bedrock principle is not subject to the wild emotions that attend to a Supreme Court nomination, a presidential nomination or any other event.

There is an American way to determine innocence and guilt. One of them is not whether a victim talks a lot. Sen. Amy Klobuchar said during the Kavanaugh hearings that “the fact that she [Blasey Ford] had mentioned this before means a lot.” There is no sincerity in this approach, for if there were, it would “mean a lot” that Biden’s accuser has “mentioned this before.” But skeptics of Kavanaugh, such as Klobuchar, are believers of Biden.

As #MeToo has shown, it does not necessarily mean a thing whether assault victims “mention” their suffering. Some do, some don’t, for a variety of reasons either way. Which means that it is excruciatingly difficult to determine innocence and guilt in an abuse charge when it comes decades after the fact. Because such a charge took this long to come out, it may never have happened or it may have been too emotionally difficult to speak about earlier. This is the conundrum — legal and emotional — in determining innocence and guilt long after the date of the alleged behavior. This conundrum will not be alleviated by partisan name-calling and emotional accusations for or against any Republican or Democrat, whatever office he or she might aspire to.

For those who dislike Kavanaugh’s judicial philosophy or Trump’s authority to nominate a conservative judge, and for those who dislike Joe Biden as a potential president, the charges of abuse against both of them must remain irrelevant unless and until they are proven in a court of law.

In the case of Harvey Weinstein, the charges stood up in a court of law. It is true that he would not have been found guilty because he would not even have been charged had not brave women spoken up against his vile behavior. So yes, let accusers speak up, but also let their charges be tested in court before they have any repercussion or damage any reputation. No withdrawal, resignation or public shaming should result from a charge alone.

Joe Biden recently revised and expanded his comments during the Kavanaugh hearing this way: “ . . . the presumption would be she’s telling the truth unless it’s proved she wasn’t telling the truth, or unless it’s clear from the facts surrounding it that it isn’t the truth.”

Biden has it exactly backward. He is saying of the accused: guilty until proven innocent. That would be the end of our legal system. (It would also, by the way, dictate Biden’s own guilt. His accuser has not been disproven.) Biden also said recently that the way for the truth in these matters to be determined is, “the press should rigorously investigate claims they [women] make.” The press has a critical role, but the final arbiter is not the press. It’s the court.

Copyright © 2020 by the Intermountain Jewish News




Leave a Reply