This video was out when I first joined reddit around 2016. Not only was she real, but there is a witness. Also, there are plenty of verifications during that time period. You can say that you don’t believe her, but you can’t say it’s not real.
Mason signed on this week to represent the plaintiff, who filed her complaint as “Jane Doe,” according to court records. He is best known as the defense attorney for Casey Anthony, the Florida woman acquitted on charges of killing her 2-year-old daughter in 2008.
Donald Trump is accused of having forcible sex with the plaintiff while attending a party at the NYC apartment of convicted billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, according to the complaint. The plaintiff also claims that Epstein raped her twice at two such parties.
Two witnesses provided affidavits filed by the plaintiff under the names “Joan Doe” and “Tiffany Doe” that back up the woman’s story.
“Joan Doe” claims that the plaintiff told her about the assaults in 1994–95 shortly after they are alleged to have occurred.
I don’t think it’s fair to say that he’s saying he doesn’t believe her. He’s saying that it’s not easy to prove her existence. Just because you ask for facts and evidence does not mean that you side with the accused. That would mean that the whole justice system sides with the accused at all times because they require facts and evidence in a court of law.
I can say Katie Johnson might not be real because if you had read the article I linked to, you would know that Norm Lubow is the person who actually filed the lawsuit, not Katie Johnson.
Norm Lubow was also pretending to be someone named Al Taylor, who was also aggressively pushing the accusation with journalist.
Even Radar Online, which is linked in the post here is a known gossip site that didn’t believe Katie Johnson story to be credible either.
The gossip site Radar Online published a short story on April 28, 2016, noting the filing, but even it was skeptical, highlighting the fact that the person filing the claim had given apparently bogus contact information, using the address of a foreclosed house whose owner had recently died.
How does that work, filing a lawsuit on someone’s behalf, without the court being able to even verify their existence? That doesn’t make too much sense to me. She would have testify, no? It seems otherwise that’d be a pretty glaring issue with the justice system, if you can just make up people to represent without identifying them?
if you look at their original comment there is blue text. That is something you can click, genius. It leads to an article. I’ve got no dog in this fight, but you being so obtuse made me need to respond.
I don’t think you provide the Snopes link, I’m saying I did in the original comment that you replied to.
I’m actually wondering now if we are using different Lemmy platforms and we’re fighting because maybe what you see in your site isn’t what I see on mine.
Have you watched Katie Johnson’s testimony? This was before trump was elected. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnib-OORRRo&lis=
What is the source for this video? None of the links in the description include this video.
The link to the court case shows that Katie Johnson was completely unreachable by the court system and letters were repeated returned to sender.
Snopes and the Guardian researched Katie Johnson and neither were able to find credible claims.
I’m not saying she doesn’t exist only that there is reasonable doubt here.
This video was out when I first joined reddit around 2016. Not only was she real, but there is a witness. Also, there are plenty of verifications during that time period. You can say that you don’t believe her, but you can’t say it’s not real.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/mikehayes/attorney-donald-trump-will-have-to-answer-teens-rape-accusat#.gtDdpq85m
I don’t think it’s fair to say that he’s saying he doesn’t believe her. He’s saying that it’s not easy to prove her existence. Just because you ask for facts and evidence does not mean that you side with the accused. That would mean that the whole justice system sides with the accused at all times because they require facts and evidence in a court of law.
I can say Katie Johnson might not be real because if you had read the article I linked to, you would know that Norm Lubow is the person who actually filed the lawsuit, not Katie Johnson.
Norm Lubow was also pretending to be someone named Al Taylor, who was also aggressively pushing the accusation with journalist.
Even Radar Online, which is linked in the post here is a known gossip site that didn’t believe Katie Johnson story to be credible either.
How does that work, filing a lawsuit on someone’s behalf, without the court being able to even verify their existence? That doesn’t make too much sense to me. She would have testify, no? It seems otherwise that’d be a pretty glaring issue with the justice system, if you can just make up people to represent without identifying them?
She would have to testify and the courts couldn’t reach her so the case was dropped. The filer gave a fake address.
Read the article, my dude.
Also I can tell you didn’t read my article because it addresses the sketchy video of the pixelated woman.
What article did you link? You seem to be trying to discredit this video for no reason. A person afraid for their life is usually hard to find.
You replied to me linking a Snopes article on this.
You didn’t even read what you replied to?
You seem to be confused and/or trolling.
if you look at their original comment there is blue text. That is something you can click, genius. It leads to an article. I’ve got no dog in this fight, but you being so obtuse made me need to respond.
Removed by mod
Fact one
Fact two
Note: It’s to buzzfeed
Fact three
Last comment.
I don’t think you provide the Snopes link, I’m saying I did in the original comment that you replied to.
I’m actually wondering now if we are using different Lemmy platforms and we’re fighting because maybe what you see in your site isn’t what I see on mine.
Like…are we mad at each other for no reason?
Maybe? There is no link for me.