The Instigator
Stupidape
Con (against)
The Contender
Flickr_G
Pro (for)

Donald Trump's child rape case allegations are credible.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Flickr_G has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/3/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 291 times Debate No: 94395
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

Stupidape

Con

I think the new child rape allegations against Donald Trump are not credible and should be thrown away.

First, and foremost, there is no mention of camera evidence. Eyewitness accounts are unreliable at best. The fact that the plaintiff claim she had a witness is of little consequence. [0] Since 22 years have gone by, the chances of DNA evidence are minimal.

Since people are considered innocent into guilty, if this goes to trial, it will be simply unreliable eyewitness accounts against each other. The fact that the plaintiff alleges that she was threaten shouldn't matter either. Again, because she has no proof that she was threatened, only her word.


Finally, we can't even be sure this person exists. "the address listed on the paperwork leads to an abandoned property, and the phone number goes straight to voicemail." [1]


"The 8-1 decision came as a disappointment to some criminal law experts who say false identifications by eyewitnesses are a leading cause of wrongful convictions."[2]

We cannot put an innocent man through the trouble of a trial based upon eyewitness accounts. There are some who even want to ban eyewitness accounts from courtrooms, due to wrongful convictions. After 22 years, how would she even know if it really was the accused, or somebody else?


Given the timing of Trump's presidential election this smells of rotten politics. There is no chance of convicting Trump based upon an eye witness account. Therefore, the only reason somebody would bring this up is to smear Trump's reputation. The accusations are non-credible and should be ignored.


Sources
0. http://www.scientificamerican.com...
1. http://www.snopes.com...
2. http://articles.latimes.com...
Flickr_G

Pro

Camera Evidence - If this was a high end, sex slavery ring amongst the rich, elite and powerful (remember others accused in Epstein"s sex ring included royalty), it is highly unlikely any home videos would have been made. The sexual assaults were alleged to have taken place in 1994, so CCTV is unlikely to still be around. If either form of video did once exist, it would likely a) have been in the hands of the perpetrators and consequently destroyed upon Epstein"s investigation; b) thrown out when that type of media was converted to DVD, hard drives, etc. Lack of camera evidence is unfortunate but does not prove that no crime took place.

Eye witnesses only - We have no idea what evidence may or may not exist. Whilst harder to prove, there are many crimes that get found out & punished after the fact. There may be written evidence or items of clothing stored in an attic, but thats also just speculative. Eye witness accounts should not be dismissed simply because we can't see into people's memories, or else we"d have to dismiss most of human history.

I would also like to challenge your opinion that "the only reason somebody would bring this up is to smear Trump's reputation." Many children and teenagers keep quiet about abuse for years or decades, particularly when the abuser is in a position of power over them. Trump was a powerful business man, and supposedly threatened not just the girl but also her family. With the previous failed attempts by alleged victims since the 90s, it would discourage others from speaking up, but perhaps you"re partially right about political motivations. With a real possibility he could become president, perhaps the alleged victim felt her values couldn"t allow that happen and that gave her the strength to speak up now - hypothetically.

I"ve copied my argument for warranting an investigation from the other debate - it covers your "final" argument:

Less than 1% of rape allegations are falsely made. (Mic - 15/5/13)

"Katie Johnson", has made two separate claims about Trump for the same circumstances, the 1st was thrown for administrative reasons after Trump"s lawyer implies the victim doesn"t exist. Upon the second attempt, a witness ("Tiffany Doe", allegedly connected to the already convicted friend of Trump, Epstein) is brought forward to back up the story. (Daily Mail - 29/4/16)

This already shows that there is a level of determination by the apparently non-existent victim to pursue this complaint. I would suggest that a hoax wouldn"t bother make a second attempt if already discredited.

Trump"s lawyer, Garten, suggests that because the address and telephone aren"t registered to the victim, it implies proof of dishonesty, but when we are also told that they have less than $300 to their name, there is a plausible argument that the victim might not be able to afford a permanent residence or phone contract of their own. An alternative scenario could be that following her time as a "sex slave" she was forced into a life on the streets, therefore giving a friend"s contact details or squatting at the foreclosed house at the time of filling the report.

Ethically, should not all alleged crimes be investigated? If there is no evidence or witnesses to prove a connection between the two ladies and Trump, then the case would be dismissed anyway. Is it not a bigger risk to just ignore the allegation?

Particularly when Trump has a trail of similar accusations from that time period:

His ex wife, Ivana, accused him of "raping" her in 1989. She was later made to sign a gagging order in regards to their marriage, but was granted a divorce on the grounds of "cruel and inhuman treatment" against her by Trump. Even when she retracted her statement, this was not in full, changing the definition of the word rape, from a physical act to an emotional state. Twenty years on a court would probably conclude that the aggressive act, still constitute some form of sexual assault. (Independent - 27/1/16)

Jill Harth Houraney accused Trump of sexually assaulting her over a business contract in 1993. It is particularly notable that she said Trump refers to making her his "sex slave" a term used in the Johnson accusations. (NY Daily - 6/5/97)

Selina Scott, accused Trump of stalking and sending her abusive correspondence in 1995, after she said "unflattering" things about him in a documentary. (Telegraph - 27/1/16)

Aside from these allegations, he also has supported other powerful men accused of similar sex crimes. In 1992, he managed to stop Tyson being imprisoned for rape against a teenager (mother jones - 7/12/15). Defended Herman Cain in 2011 (NY Daily - 2/11/11) and Roger Ailes in 2016 (Rewire - 2/8/16). Trump was also known to say, prior to Epstein"s conviction (of which he only served a fraction of his sentence, part time), that he and Epstein were great friends and shared an interest in young women.

When the Cosby allegations were made, Trump"s reaction was particularly worrying as it was not about concern for the truth or justice - he instead made comments to the press that Cosby needed to use better PR because he was handling the situation wrong (eonline - 21/11/14).

If we are to have any faith left in our justice systems, we at the very least need to allow the authorities to carry out formal investigations into allegations of any form of abuse or servitude.

References:

Mic - 15/5/13 - https://mic.com...

Daily Mail - 29/4/16 - http://www.dailymail.co.uk...

Independent - 27/1/16 - http://www.independent.co.uk...

NY Daily - 6/5/97 - http://www.nydailynews.com...

Telegraph - 27/1/16 - http://www.telegraph.co.uk...

mother jones - 7/12/15 - http://www.motherjones.com...

NY Daily - 2/11/11 - http://www.nydailynews.com...

Rewire - 2/8/16 - https://rewire.news...

eonline - 21/11/14 - http://www.eonline.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Stupidape

Con

Rebuttals

Opponents in bold and italics, mine in plain text.

Paragraph 1,2 & 3, nothing contradicts what I stated. Except, maybe minor parts I'm not going to bother with.

Now my opponent is getting somewhere.


"Less than 1% of rape allegations are falsely made." (Mic - 15/5/13)


The problem is that Donald Trump is a public figure. I'm pretty sure public figures are more likely to be accused. Just for starters more money to sue in civil court. Btw, the plaintiff is asking for a pretty penny of $100 million dollars. [1] "a $100 million lawsuit"

This is certainly an insensitive to sue over the average Joe who maybe has $200,000 to his name. Second, the link references the United Kingdom. Last time I checked Donald Trump is a USA citizen.

Another study finds 6.8% are false. " Of the 117 cases that could be classified, eight—or 6.8 percent—were determined to be false complaints;" [3].

Now combine that with political motive, Donald Trump having lots of money, and being a public figure and we can state there is a good chance the allegations are trumped up.


""Katie Johnson", has made two separate claims about Trump for the same circumstances, the 1st was thrown for administrative reasons after Trump"s lawyer implies the victim doesn"t exist. Upon the second attempt, a witness ("Tiffany Doe", allegedly connected to the already convicted friend of Trump, Epstein) is brought forward to back up the story. "

We still don't know if Katie Johnson nor Tiffany Doe are even real people. This could just be a hoax.


"This already shows that there is a level of determination by the apparently non-existent victim to pursue this complaint. I would suggest that a hoax wouldn"t bother make a second attempt if already discredited." Flickr_G


100 million dollars says otherwise.


"Trump"s lawyer, Garten, suggests that because the address and telephone aren"t registered to the victim, it implies proof of dishonesty, but when we are also told that they have less than $300 to their name, there is a plausible argument that the victim might not be able to afford a permanent residence or phone contract of their own. An alternative scenario could be that following her time as a "sex slave" she was forced into a life on the streets, therefore giving a friend"s contact details or squatting at the foreclosed house at the time of filling the report." Flickr_G


Why wouldn't she just tell the court she was homeless then? I could understand if she was younger, but give the dates she must be over 30.

"Ethically, should not all alleged crimes be investigated? If there is no evidence or witnesses to prove a connection between the two ladies and Trump, then the case would be dismissed anyway. Is it not a bigger risk to just ignore the allegation?" Flickr_G


The police have limited time and resources. They cannot take too much time away from more serious crimes. Also, going through a trial is stressful and time consuming for the defendant innocent or guilty.


"His ex wife, Ivana, accused him of "raping" her in 1989. She was later made to sign a gagging order in regards to their marriage, but was granted a divorce on the grounds of "cruel and inhuman treatment" against her by Trump. Even when she retracted her statement, this was not in full, changing the definition of the word rape, from a physical act to an emotional state. Twenty years on a court would probably conclude that the aggressive act, still constitute some form of sexual assault. (Independent - 27/1/16)" Flickr_G


Ivana said she retracted her statement and is best of friends with Trump. This is really good evidence that no harm was done to Ivana.


"I have recently read some comments attributed to me from nearly 30 years ago at a time of very high tension during my divorce from Donald," she said in the statement today. "The story is totally without merit. Donald and I are the best of friends and together have raised 3 children that we love and are very proud of." [4]


"Jill Harth Houraney accused Trump of sexually assaulting her over a business contract in 1993. It is particularly notable that she said Trump refers to making her his "sex slave" a term used in the Johnson accusations. (NY Daily - 6/5/97)"

The case was withdrawn.


"But yesterday, as Trump vigorously denied her charges, the woman's husband said she was planning to withdraw her suit. Trump told us that the suit "was a desperate attempt to get me to settle a case they can't win." [5]



"Selina Scott, accused Trump of stalking and sending her abusive correspondence in 1995, after she said "unflattering" things about him in a doc
umentary. (Telegraph - 27/1/16)"


Stalked mentally? With letters? [6] You misrepresented the facts to make Trump look worse here. Big difference between physically stalking someone versus sending letters.

The rest seems irrelevant to me. No authorities should not investigate every singe accusation made against people. There simply is not enough resources to perform such a deed.

Thanks for debating. My other opponents on the subject made very little effort.


Sources
3. http://www.slate.com...
4. http://abcnews.go.com...
5. http://www.nydailynews.com...
6. http://www.telegraph.co.uk...



This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Flickr_G 3 months ago
Flickr_G
Sorry Stupidape, I didn't check back in time. I'll do my rebuttal in round 3.
Posted by Stupidape 4 months ago
Stupidape
BackCommander

No idea honestly. I know almost nothing of Bill Cosby. I heard something about charges. I tried searching on the internet, but I got so many conflicting stories, the best I could do is flip a coin.
Posted by BackCommander 4 months ago
BackCommander
I feel the need to ask if you believe that Bill Cosby raped all of those girls. I don't care about whatever allegations are against trump, don't want to have a political argument in the comments, just wondering.
Posted by vi_spex 4 months ago
vi_spex
its simply to make him look bad, he is obviusly the only candidate to be taken seriusly
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.