Both women who have accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct in the 1980s lack a crucial ally in the confirmation drama: someone to corroborate their accusations.
This is a critical fact. By itself, it doesn’t mean they are being untruthful. But it weakens their case against Kavanaugh, who has strongly denied sexually abusing either of them. Both accusers identified persons who might be able to corroborate their stories, but those efforts didn’t pan out.
It denies the accusers witnesses who could speak publicly in their behalf, even appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday when Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford are scheduled to testify. (The second accuser, Deborah Ramirez, is not slated to appear.)
Corroboration wouldn’t necessarily require eyewitnesses to the alleged attacks, especially if the accusers had told others of being attacked by Kavanaugh at some reasonable point after the attacks. In Ford’s case, she has said she didn’t recall the alleged attack until 30 years later. She told a therapist.
On Wednesday, Ford’s lawyers submitted affidavits from four persons who said they had heard Ford tell about the alleged assault. But this was 30 years after the incident, far too distant for them to be considered corroborating witnesses.
According to Ford, she was forced by Kavanaugh during a teenage drinking party into a room, where he attempted to take off her clothes. She escaped.
Four others were identified by Ford as being in the room—Kavanaugh, two friends of his, and Leland Keyser, a longtime friend of Ford’s. Kavanaugh and his friends denied they were there. That made Keyser’s role all the more crucial.
As it turned out, she had no corroboration to offer. Last Saturday night, her lawyer said in a statement that she “does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where was present with, or without Dr. Ford.”
Ramirez, the second accuser, accused Kavanaugh of exposing himself to her at a party when they were first-year students at Yale. She identified two students she thought might have been eyewitnesses. But one said he had no recollection of the incident. The other said the same. And no one has identified Kavanaugh as having been at the party. The closest thing there is to corroboration is one anonymous person who says that they had heard about such an incident at the time—but wasn’t there.
