BREAKING: Accuser LIED About Having No Contact With Roy Moore After Alleged Sexual Assault

[ph3iron]

Wow. Imagine being assigned a pedophile Judge that raped you as a child. Disgusting.

So you were there during the rape. You saw him rape her? Why have you waited so long to speak up?

You'd think that with something as important as a divorce, the little "victim" would have been old enough to ask for a recusal of the judge on the case, and why she was demanding his removal..

As they say if you are not a 14 yr old girl being raped you have zero to say how the hell do you know?
Soros, amazing influence.
Funded the IRA I hear.

 

[jillian]

You sure she was there? I never saw the judge who finalized my divorce. He was assigned and dismissed hers, maybe because she didn't show? Hmmmmmmm.
I'd dig a little deeper on that one.

no need to dig. that isn't personal contact. and she wouldn't have had any choice in the judge she was assigned to.

he's a maroon

Er...ummm...motion for recusal and one would think that if you were assigned a Judge that had previously sexually assaulted you it would be the first thing your attorney would file.

Of course maybe she had a moron like you for a lawyer that didn't know he could do that.

er... ummm... no one is making that motion in a small town. and it is likely she never even appeared at the time of them motion.

what reason would he have had to recuse? he didn't have a problem with mom... mom had a problem with him.

LOL, You mean the plaintiff being a victim of a previous sexual assault by the judge isn't reason enough? It's not relevant whether or not the judge granted the motion to recuse, what matters is that one was never filed, which is an indication the sexual assault allegations where recently manufactured OR her lawyer was a retard like you are.

She didn't TELL her lawyer. No one knew but her mom and a couple of friends from back in the day, remember? So how the hell was he supposed to file a motion to recuse?

There was also no basis for a recusal

 

[Harpy Eagle]

She never appeared in front of him, that is why the petition for divorce was dismissed by Moore

Indeed.

There was not contact.

"The details of the case were first exposed by a pseudonymous Twitter account, which dug up the documents from that divorce action.
-----> there was no occasion for Moore and Nelson to cross paths. The case was dismissed shortly after it was filed as Nelson and her husband attempted to reconcile.

The documents do show that Nelson, then Beverly Harris, filed a divorce action against her then-husband in May of 1999. All of the initial documents, however, were signed by a different district judge, W. D. Russell. On May 25, 1999, Judge Russell scheduled the first hearing for the case for June 16.
But that hearing never took place. In June, before the scheduled hearing was set to take place, she filed for a motion to “continue” (delay) the hearing because she and her husband “are going to counseling and are attempting to reconcile.”

A month later, she filed a motion to dismiss the case. That appears to be the only document Moore signed, and given there was no hearing, there is no reason the divorce action would have required her to enter the courthouse or have contact with Moore.

Moore’s attorney acknowledged that he didn’t even personally sign this document. Rather, it was a routine filing where his name was stamped by an assistant. Nelson did eventually file for divorce again, but it was five years later, and a different judge, District Judge Donald W. Stewart, oversaw and signed the final divorce papers.

The only explanation for Jauregui claiming “there was contact” between Moore and Nelson because of this divorce action is to undermine Nelson’s credibility. In doing so, he only further undermined Moore’s."

I wonder if Moore’s lawyer could be punished for spreading what he had to know was a lie


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[jc456]

She never appeared in front of him, that is why the petition for divorce was dismissed by Moore

Indeed.

There was not contact.

"The details of the case were first exposed by a pseudonymous Twitter account, which dug up the documents from that divorce action.
-----> there was no occasion for Moore and Nelson to cross paths. The case was dismissed shortly after it was filed as Nelson and her husband attempted to reconcile.

The documents do show that Nelson, then Beverly Harris, filed a divorce action against her then-husband in May of 1999. All of the initial documents, however, were signed by a different district judge, W. D. Russell. On May 25, 1999, Judge Russell scheduled the first hearing for the case for June 16.
But that hearing never took place. In June, before the scheduled hearing was set to take place, she filed for a motion to “continue” (delay) the hearing because she and her husband “are going to counseling and are attempting to reconcile.”

A month later, she filed a motion to dismiss the case. That appears to be the only document Moore signed, and given there was no hearing, there is no reason the divorce action would have required her to enter the courthouse or have contact with Moore.

Moore’s attorney acknowledged that he didn’t even personally sign this document. Rather, it was a routine filing where his name was stamped by an assistant. Nelson did eventually file for divorce again, but it was five years later, and a different judge, District Judge Donald W. Stewart, oversaw and signed the final divorce papers.

The only explanation for Jauregui claiming “there was contact” between Moore and Nelson because of this divorce action is to undermine Nelson’s credibility. In doing so, he only further undermined Moore’s."

Doesn't matter. The loons will still lie and try to smear anyone who tells the truth about their sexual predators.

so was judge moore's signature on her documents? if so, she encountered him afterword and said nothing.

 

[jc456]

She never appeared in front of him, that is why the petition for divorce was dismissed by Moore

Indeed.

There was not contact.

"The details of the case were first exposed by a pseudonymous Twitter account, which dug up the documents from that divorce action.
-----> there was no occasion for Moore and Nelson to cross paths. The case was dismissed shortly after it was filed as Nelson and her husband attempted to reconcile.

The documents do show that Nelson, then Beverly Harris, filed a divorce action against her then-husband in May of 1999. All of the initial documents, however, were signed by a different district judge, W. D. Russell. On May 25, 1999, Judge Russell scheduled the first hearing for the case for June 16.
But that hearing never took place. In June, before the scheduled hearing was set to take place, she filed for a motion to “continue” (delay) the hearing because she and her husband “are going to counseling and are attempting to reconcile.”

A month later, she filed a motion to dismiss the case. That appears to be the only document Moore signed, and given there was no hearing, there is no reason the divorce action would have required her to enter the courthouse or have contact with Moore.

Moore’s attorney acknowledged that he didn’t even personally sign this document. Rather, it was a routine filing where his name was stamped by an assistant. Nelson did eventually file for divorce again, but it was five years later, and a different judge, District Judge Donald W. Stewart, oversaw and signed the final divorce papers.

The only explanation for Jauregui claiming “there was contact” between Moore and Nelson because of this divorce action is to undermine Nelson’s credibility. In doing so, he only further undermined Moore’s."

I wonder if Moore’s lawyer could be punished for spreading what he had to know was a lie


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

what, he signed her documents right? It says Roy Moore on them right? why did the lady not say anything? it's fking simple.

 

[jillian]

She never appeared in front of him, that is why the petition for divorce was dismissed by Moore

Indeed.

There was not contact.

"The details of the case were first exposed by a pseudonymous Twitter account, which dug up the documents from that divorce action.
-----> there was no occasion for Moore and Nelson to cross paths. The case was dismissed shortly after it was filed as Nelson and her husband attempted to reconcile.

The documents do show that Nelson, then Beverly Harris, filed a divorce action against her then-husband in May of 1999. All of the initial documents, however, were signed by a different district judge, W. D. Russell. On May 25, 1999, Judge Russell scheduled the first hearing for the case for June 16.
But that hearing never took place. In June, before the scheduled hearing was set to take place, she filed for a motion to “continue” (delay) the hearing because she and her husband “are going to counseling and are attempting to reconcile.”

A month later, she filed a motion to dismiss the case. That appears to be the only document Moore signed, and given there was no hearing, there is no reason the divorce action would have required her to enter the courthouse or have contact with Moore.

Moore’s attorney acknowledged that he didn’t even personally sign this document. Rather, it was a routine filing where his name was stamped by an assistant. Nelson did eventually file for divorce again, but it was five years later, and a different judge, District Judge Donald W. Stewart, oversaw and signed the final divorce papers.

The only explanation for Jauregui claiming “there was contact” between Moore and Nelson because of this divorce action is to undermine Nelson’s credibility. In doing so, he only further undermined Moore’s."

I wonder if Moore’s lawyer could be punished for spreading what he had to know was a lie


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

what, he signed her documents right? It says Roy Moore on them right? why did the lady not say anything? it's fking simple.

You are either intentionally obtuse or you are a moron. Your call as to which you choose.

On what basis would a) she even have known what judge was assigned to sign a standard dismissal; and b) what that occurred up to that date (aside from his wrongdoing) would have led him to act improperly in signing the order?

You can't just ask a judge to recuse from a ministerii act without cause

 

[paperview]

You are either intentionally obtuse or you are a moron. Your call as to which you choose.
...

Survey says....

BOTH.

 

[ph3iron]

She never appeared in front of him, that is why the petition for divorce was dismissed by Moore

Indeed.

There was not contact.

"The details of the case were first exposed by a pseudonymous Twitter account, which dug up the documents from that divorce action.
-----> there was no occasion for Moore and Nelson to cross paths. The case was dismissed shortly after it was filed as Nelson and her husband attempted to reconcile.

The documents do show that Nelson, then Beverly Harris, filed a divorce action against her then-husband in May of 1999. All of the initial documents, however, were signed by a different district judge, W. D. Russell. On May 25, 1999, Judge Russell scheduled the first hearing for the case for June 16.
But that hearing never took place. In June, before the scheduled hearing was set to take place, she filed for a motion to “continue” (delay) the hearing because she and her husband “are going to counseling and are attempting to reconcile.”

A month later, she filed a motion to dismiss the case. That appears to be the only document Moore signed, and given there was no hearing, there is no reason the divorce action would have required her to enter the courthouse or have contact with Moore.

Moore’s attorney acknowledged that he didn’t even personally sign this document. Rather, it was a routine filing where his name was stamped by an assistant. Nelson did eventually file for divorce again, but it was five years later, and a different judge, District Judge Donald W. Stewart, oversaw and signed the final divorce papers.

The only explanation for Jauregui claiming “there was contact” between Moore and Nelson because of this divorce action is to undermine Nelson’s credibility. In doing so, he only further undermined Moore’s."

I wonder if Moore’s lawyer could be punished for spreading what he had to know was a lie


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

what, he signed her documents right? It says Roy Moore on them right? why did the lady not say anything? it's fking simple.

You are either intentionally obtuse or you are a moron. Your call as to which you choose.

On what basis would a) she even have known what judge was assigned to sign a standard dismissal; and b) what that occurred up to that date (aside from his wrongdoing) would have led him to act improperly in signing the order?

You can't just ask a judge to recuse from a ministerii act without cause

Oh be quiet quoting facts to the white .C Grabber high school cult
They know what it's like to be fondled as a teenager
They would have bravely come forward

 

[Harpy Eagle]

She never appeared in front of him, that is why the petition for divorce was dismissed by Moore

Indeed.

There was not contact.

"The details of the case were first exposed by a pseudonymous Twitter account, which dug up the documents from that divorce action.
-----> there was no occasion for Moore and Nelson to cross paths. The case was dismissed shortly after it was filed as Nelson and her husband attempted to reconcile.

The documents do show that Nelson, then Beverly Harris, filed a divorce action against her then-husband in May of 1999. All of the initial documents, however, were signed by a different district judge, W. D. Russell. On May 25, 1999, Judge Russell scheduled the first hearing for the case for June 16.
But that hearing never took place. In June, before the scheduled hearing was set to take place, she filed for a motion to “continue” (delay) the hearing because she and her husband “are going to counseling and are attempting to reconcile.”

A month later, she filed a motion to dismiss the case. That appears to be the only document Moore signed, and given there was no hearing, there is no reason the divorce action would have required her to enter the courthouse or have contact with Moore.

Moore’s attorney acknowledged that he didn’t even personally sign this document. Rather, it was a routine filing where his name was stamped by an assistant. Nelson did eventually file for divorce again, but it was five years later, and a different judge, District Judge Donald W. Stewart, oversaw and signed the final divorce papers.

The only explanation for Jauregui claiming “there was contact” between Moore and Nelson because of this divorce action is to undermine Nelson’s credibility. In doing so, he only further undermined Moore’s."

I wonder if Moore’s lawyer could be punished for spreading what he had to know was a lie


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

what, he signed her documents right? It says Roy Moore on them right? why did the lady not say anything? it's fking simple.

The only thing he signed was the dismissal of her petition for divorce. Good chance she never even saw it after it was signed.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[paperview]

She never appeared in front of him, that is why the petition for divorce was dismissed by Moore

Indeed.

There was not contact.

"The details of the case were first exposed by a pseudonymous Twitter account, which dug up the documents from that divorce action.
-----> there was no occasion for Moore and Nelson to cross paths. The case was dismissed shortly after it was filed as Nelson and her husband attempted to reconcile.

The documents do show that Nelson, then Beverly Harris, filed a divorce action against her then-husband in May of 1999. All of the initial documents, however, were signed by a different district judge, W. D. Russell. On May 25, 1999, Judge Russell scheduled the first hearing for the case for June 16.
But that hearing never took place. In June, before the scheduled hearing was set to take place, she filed for a motion to “continue” (delay) the hearing because she and her husband “are going to counseling and are attempting to reconcile.”

A month later, she filed a motion to dismiss the case. That appears to be the only document Moore signed, and given there was no hearing, there is no reason the divorce action would have required her to enter the courthouse or have contact with Moore.

Moore’s attorney acknowledged that he didn’t even personally sign this document. Rather, it was a routine filing where his name was stamped by an assistant. Nelson did eventually file for divorce again, but it was five years later, and a different judge, District Judge Donald W. Stewart, oversaw and signed the final divorce papers.

The only explanation for Jauregui claiming “there was contact” between Moore and Nelson because of this divorce action is to undermine Nelson’s credibility. In doing so, he only further undermined Moore’s."

I wonder if Moore’s lawyer could be punished for spreading what he had to know was a lie


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

what, he signed her documents right? It says Roy Moore on them right? why did the lady not say anything? it's fking simple.

The only thing he signed was the dismissal of her petition for divorce. Good chance she never even saw it after it was signed.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Moore didn't even sign it personally. That is a rubber stamp.

 

[jc456]

She never appeared in front of him, that is why the petition for divorce was dismissed by Moore

Indeed.

There was not contact.

"The details of the case were first exposed by a pseudonymous Twitter account, which dug up the documents from that divorce action.
-----> there was no occasion for Moore and Nelson to cross paths. The case was dismissed shortly after it was filed as Nelson and her husband attempted to reconcile.

The documents do show that Nelson, then Beverly Harris, filed a divorce action against her then-husband in May of 1999. All of the initial documents, however, were signed by a different district judge, W. D. Russell. On May 25, 1999, Judge Russell scheduled the first hearing for the case for June 16.
But that hearing never took place. In June, before the scheduled hearing was set to take place, she filed for a motion to “continue” (delay) the hearing because she and her husband “are going to counseling and are attempting to reconcile.”

A month later, she filed a motion to dismiss the case. That appears to be the only document Moore signed, and given there was no hearing, there is no reason the divorce action would have required her to enter the courthouse or have contact with Moore.

Moore’s attorney acknowledged that he didn’t even personally sign this document. Rather, it was a routine filing where his name was stamped by an assistant. Nelson did eventually file for divorce again, but it was five years later, and a different judge, District Judge Donald W. Stewart, oversaw and signed the final divorce papers.

The only explanation for Jauregui claiming “there was contact” between Moore and Nelson because of this divorce action is to undermine Nelson’s credibility. In doing so, he only further undermined Moore’s."

I wonder if Moore’s lawyer could be punished for spreading what he had to know was a lie


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

what, he signed her documents right? It says Roy Moore on them right? why did the lady not say anything? it's fking simple.

The only thing he signed was the dismissal of her petition for divorce. Good chance she never even saw it after it was signed.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Moore didn't even sign it personally. That is a rubber stamp.

LOL, it is his name right? the one in her yearbook right? LOL

 

[jc456]

She never appeared in front of him, that is why the petition for divorce was dismissed by Moore

Indeed.

There was not contact.

"The details of the case were first exposed by a pseudonymous Twitter account, which dug up the documents from that divorce action.
-----> there was no occasion for Moore and Nelson to cross paths. The case was dismissed shortly after it was filed as Nelson and her husband attempted to reconcile.

The documents do show that Nelson, then Beverly Harris, filed a divorce action against her then-husband in May of 1999. All of the initial documents, however, were signed by a different district judge, W. D. Russell. On May 25, 1999, Judge Russell scheduled the first hearing for the case for June 16.
But that hearing never took place. In June, before the scheduled hearing was set to take place, she filed for a motion to “continue” (delay) the hearing because she and her husband “are going to counseling and are attempting to reconcile.”

A month later, she filed a motion to dismiss the case. That appears to be the only document Moore signed, and given there was no hearing, there is no reason the divorce action would have required her to enter the courthouse or have contact with Moore.

Moore’s attorney acknowledged that he didn’t even personally sign this document. Rather, it was a routine filing where his name was stamped by an assistant. Nelson did eventually file for divorce again, but it was five years later, and a different judge, District Judge Donald W. Stewart, oversaw and signed the final divorce papers.

The only explanation for Jauregui claiming “there was contact” between Moore and Nelson because of this divorce action is to undermine Nelson’s credibility. In doing so, he only further undermined Moore’s."

I wonder if Moore’s lawyer could be punished for spreading what he had to know was a lie


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

what, he signed her documents right? It says Roy Moore on them right? why did the lady not say anything? it's fking simple.

You are either intentionally obtuse or you are a moron. Your call as to which you choose.

On what basis would a) she even have known what judge was assigned to sign a standard dismissal; and b) what that occurred up to that date (aside from his wrongdoing) would have led him to act improperly in signing the order?

You can't just ask a judge to recuse from a ministerii act without cause

cause she had a lawyer?

 

[Kondor3]

...He isn't my boy...

Correct. He isn't. And you're now about to realize why everyone was trying to talk you out of jumping off that cliff.

...So you believe in punishing perhaps people for things for which they are not guilty...

There is no legal justice after the Statute of Limitations runs out.

There is only the justice of the Court of Public Opinion.

Multiple allegations of pedophilia, from multiple, disconnected sources, are enough to convict, in that Court of the Voting Public.

Your boy's (politically, metaphorically) dead.

A (metaphorical) walking corpse that doesn't know yet, that it is dead.

Rather like a chicken with its head cut off, running around the barnyard, flapping its wings, spewing blood from its neck, until its nervous system catches up with Reality, and it lies down, spasms, and has the decency to die.

...Call that word play if you like. Words mean things.

Words do, indeed, mean something.

Pedophilia means Political Death.

Was there anything else?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Pedophilia means Political Death.

Unless you are a Repub from Alabama then it is a rite of passage it seems.

 

[william the wie]

Dear liberal lunatics Moore has filed a defamation suit. He knows all of the state judges, the trial jurisdiction. If you think 2016 made you look like a troop of monkeys 2018 will be worse if Moore has time to work on his defamation suit.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Dear liberal lunatics Moore has filed a defamation suit. He knows all of the state judges, the trial jurisdiction. If you think 2016 made you look like a troop of monkeys 2018 will be worse if Moore has time to work on his defamation suit.

I am sure there are a few judges in Alabama that do not support child molesters, though probably not many

 

[basquebromance]

"I've taken a stand in the past, I'll take a stand in the future and I'll quit standing when they lay me in that box and put me in the ground." - Crazy Roy Moore