Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill (R) on Wednesday said the state’s Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore is “innocent until proven guilty” of allegations of sexual misconduct that six women have brought against him.
“What I have stated before and what I maintain is that an individual is innocent until proven guilty,” Merrill said on MSNBC.
He said the “original” allegations against Moore “are very serious.”
“And I think they need to continue to be vetted. I think all allegations or additional information that’s brought forward should be vetted,” Merrill said. “And again I feel as though if Judge Moore is indeed guilty of these allegations, that he should withdraw.”
Merrill on Tuesday said it was “possible” the women accusing Moore of misconduct were “making it up.”
Two more women came forward late Wednesday with allegations against Moore, bringing the total count to seven. Kelly Harrison Thorp told AL.com that Moore asked her out when she was 17 years old. Thorp said that Moore told her he went out with girls her age “all the time.”
Tina Johnson alleged that Moore groped her when she was 28 years old as she was leaving his law office.
Four women last week alleged that Moore pursued them for relationships when they were teenagers and he was in his early 30s. One, Leigh Corfman, said Moore initiated a sexual encounter with her when she was 14 years old. A fifth accuser, Beverly Young Nelson, on Monday said Moore sexually assaulted her when she was 16 years old.
Moore has denied the allegations.
If Moore is innocent until proven guilty, then the women are guilty (of lying) until proven innocent.
Edit to Clarify (2 hours later): What I was trying to point out is that if the AL Secretary of State presumes Moore innocent of assault, harassment, and pedophilia, then he must also presume that the eight (so far) women are guilty of lying.
In other words, the man gets the presumption of innocence, and the 8 women don’t.
That works in a court of law, but not in the court of public opinion (or in Senate races).
Oh sure, if/when a formal indictment is brought. That “innocent until proven guilty” rule only applies to formal judicial proceedings.
When it’s surrounding a candidacy, the accusations aren’t about courts and trials or ‘burdens of proof’. They’re about revealing character and temperament. We’ve seen pretty compelling evidence (the signed yearbook), and the public testimony of two women who say he assaulted them when they were teens, one of them quite underage at 14. He-said-she-said only applies to one vs one. This is now seven vs one. No longer he-said-she-said.
For me, the yearbook is the smoking gun. If it can be proven it isn’t his handwriting, I’ll soften my position about it. Otherwise, the man is a predator and a sexual abuser in my book, and has no place in our Senate.
Then Abraham approached him and said: “Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? What if there is one righteous person in the Alabama GOP? Will you really sweep it away and not spare the party for the sake of the one righteous person in it?"
(Slight modifications.)
“Unless it’s Hillary Clinton,” he added.