The Trial of the Brett Kavanaugh vs. Christine Ford - Essay Sample

Introduction

There is a saying that every dog has its own day. Was the 27th of September 2018 be Brett Kavanaugh's day of prosecution? The discrediting of the U. S Supreme Court candidate, Kavanaugh was a hardball politics at its most deceit. History always seems so inevitable in reflection, shaped by strong figures that operate beyond our control. This is evident, when Christine Ford walked in the court, before the Senate Judiciary Committee to speak the truth about the bitterness of her past experience. This became a global discussion in the media and lit up an agitation that was heavily influenced by the stipulated conventions and indefinite facts. Ford's exposure of the event involved the political, and social unfairness by preoccupying on either the credibility, sensibility or reasoning of each testimony. Ford's speech was already known even before she spoke it before the Senate Judiciary Committee on that fateful day. Ford's emotions filled the hall stage, as she spoke the traumatic memories and years of shame. During the questioning, Ford went on so confident that she knew the person who was behind her traumatic experience, and that it was Mr. Kavanaugh, who raped her 36 years ago. Her story rose so many political and ethic based biases, as different reactions arose from different members of the Judicial Senate Committee sitting. The accused, Mr. Kavanaugh was fighting for his professional life, when it was his turn to testify. He had to fight for his reputation as a husband, a father and a son, and mostly as a candidate of the Supreme Court Justice. This situation was politically biased because if Kavanaugh would win the case, he would get appointed as the Supreme Court Justice, he is an ethical bias because if Kavanaugh was proven guilty and lost the case, his reputation to solve morally obscure cases would be lost.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Most of the women and men, globally who have lived with the trauma of sexual abuse were having high hopes and fears, riding on the credibility of Ford's speak out. The way she was treated in the halls of power and justice and the way she was received by the anxious public send a signal to the majority of the survivors living with the wrestle of whether they should speak up or not (Edwards, 2018). At stake was a lifetime appointment that was able to change the decades of legal rulings and affect the nation's trust in its Judiciary.

The moment the countrymen had been waiting, to see and hear from this noble woman, whose picture had only been a faded photograph, and now she was live on the Capitol Hill, facing a lofty dais of Senators to courageously pour her heart out. The major part of the case was the disjointed format that included a 5-minute segment of alterations between the veteran sex crimes prosecutor Rachel Mitchell, Democratic senators and a surrogate questioner for the Republicans (Klein, 2018).

Ms. Mitchell's aim was to pursue in a methodical prosecution way and pull various threads to Ford's claim. The threads seemed too much geared towards undermining Ford's credibility, the type of strategy that is useful in trials to undermine a judge's trust in a witness or force them to get weary under the accumulated pressures of interrogations. The threads of questions put across by Ms. Mitchell were such suggestive to show she was not biased on either side, but she was rightfully doing her profession ethically; who drove her on the party night too and from her house? If she often traveled by air for pleasure, why was she afraid of flying to meet the Senate investigators in Washington? Did she or did she not share her therapy records of 2012 with a reporter from the Washington Post? (Edwards, 2018)

The Democrats, however, threw Ford support, which left the Republicans decrying the process, by the end of the first hearing, for not questioning the sincerity of Ford's statement. Ms. Mitchell found herself in a state of exasperation with the format she wanted to work with (Klein, 2018). She exclaimed that there was no study that showed that when it reaches a point to arrive at an accurate recollection of trauma, the 5-minute increments were the best way to do it.

When Ford began to share her statement, her staunchness in the words she used brought out the confidence she had in winning the case. When asked how sure she was that the voice she heard in the room 36 years ago was Kavanaugh's she confidently, with no doubt on her face said one hundred percent (Klein, 2018). By the end of her hearing, she had emptied all the proves she had as a credible witness and replaced Kavanaugh as the protagonist in the nomination narrative, for millions of citizens. She enticed women to start telling their own age-old stories of rape and harassment. On social media, the hashtag #WhyIDidntReport trailed, which gave those who have never gone to the public a platform to air their trauma of a long-ago sexual assault (Edwards, 2018).

Ford's testimony gathered women from all the places in London to San Jose, around media devices to watch her testimony, agitated, mouths agape, hands over hearts. Her confession down geared the political clout that was fully on gear. Ford's courage was recognized by mentionable leaders, such as President Trump, who never give credence to claims of female accusers and commended her as a very fine woman, a credible witness and reckoned her testimony compelling.

The Republican Senator Chick Grassley congratulated Ford for her bravery. The American Bar Association and three Republican governors voted for a delay in confirmation vote of Kavanaugh until a thorough investigation was done. The Catholic magazine America withdrew its support for Kavanaugh's nominee vote.

Kavanaugh's testimony came in with a lot of vehemence. His testimony read that where accusers saw intemperance, supporters saw justified outrage. His was to fight for his professional life and reputation as an honored man. He lashed out at the Democrats, in a quick warning that what goes around comes back around. He cracked into tears when he spoke about his family. His supporters saw a man bowed but not broken, and not giving in to the haters who wished to drag him down. His criticizers saw his performance as the results of wealthy private schools' privilege finally facing his consequences (Hamilton, 2018).

To sexual assault victims, Ford's statement was an invitation to take courage and speak up, no matter the powers held by the accused, to young men, it was a lesson that unstowed violence would sunken their lives (Murphy, 2018). Due to political biases, Ford's testimony was seemingly not going to prevent the confirmation, but it was a deep warning that wealth status or a record of professional accomplishment was not enough to override credible allegations of sexual assaults despite the period of occurrence (Zurcher, 2018).

References

Edwards, HALEY SWEETLAND. "How Christine Blasey Ford's Testimony Changed America." 2018. <http://time.com/5415027/christine-blasey-ford-testimony/>.

Hamilton, Andrew. "Challenges to respect in the Kavanaugh case." Eureka Street 28.20 (2018): 12.

Klein, Ezra. "The Ford-Kavanaugh sexual assault hearings explained." 2018. <https://www.vox.com/explainers/2018/9/27/17909782/brett-kavanaugh-christine-ford-supreme-court-senate-sexual-assault-testimony>.

Murphy, Peter. "Kavanaugh's trial by ordeal." Burning truth in effigy 62.12 (2018): 16. 2019.

Zurcher, Anthony. Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh hearing: What we learned. US & Canada: BBC News, 2018. <https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45660297>.