COMMENTARY | A 40 year old case that young Hillary Clinton was involved in, concerning the rape of a 12 year old girl, has risen up to threaten the presidential aspirations of Hillary Clinton. It shows a different portrait of a woman who claims to be a child advocate.
“In 1975, the same year she married Bill, Hillary Clinton agreed to serve as the court-appointed attorney for Thomas Alfred Taylor, a 41-year-old accused of raping the child after luring her into a car.
“The recordings, which date from 1983-1987 and have never before been reported, include Clinton’s suggestion that she knew Taylor was guilty at the time. She says she used a legal technicality to plead her client, who faced 30 years to life in prison, down to a lesser charge. The recording and transcript, along with court documents pertaining to the case, are embedded below.
“The full story of the Taylor defense calls into question Clinton’s narrative of her early years as a devoted women and children’s advocate in Arkansas-a narrative the 2016 presidential frontrunner continues to promote on her current book tour.”
The tapes suggests that Clinton had a casual, almost humorous attitude toward the case. There is no hint of any moral dilemma, even accounting for the notion that any accused criminal, even someone vicious enough to rape a 12 year old girl, deserves legal representation. Indeed she was quite frank about how she used a common tactic lawyers used to employ in rape cases, which is to say impeaching the victim’s character.
“In a July 28, 1975, court affidavit, Clinton wrote that she had been informed the young girl was ’emotionally unstable’ and had a ‘tendency to seek out older men and engage in fantasizing.’
“‘I have also been told by an expert in child psychology that children in early adolescence tend to exaggerate or romanticize sexual experiences and that adolescents in disorganized families, such as the complainant’s, are even more prone to exaggerate behavior,’ Clinton said.
“Clinton said the child had ‘in the past made false accusations about persons, claiming they had attacked her body’ and that the girl ‘exhibits an unusual stubbornness and temper when she does not get her way.'”
A mistake by the prosecution concerning forensic evidence made the attack on the victim’s character moot and allowed her to plead the charge down to uinlawfull fondling olf a child and had him sentenced to time served, about two months in jail. The girl, now 52 and divorced, has not led a happy life since then and harbors some ill will toward the lawyer who is now a presidential candidate/