November 15, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – A second accusation of sexual misconduct was made public yesterday against Judge Roy Moore as he runs for the U.S. Senate in Alabama. The woman, Beverly Young Nelson, alleges that in 1977 Roy Moore attempted to rape her while giving her a ride home from her job at a diner. Even more so than the previous ones, this allegation is deeply troubling, and if true, would be absolutely disqualifying. Judge Moore has strenuously denied the allegations and denies having ever met the alleged victim.
We should keep in mind that the alleged victim is represented by notorious celebrity feminist attorney Gloria Allred. Earlier this year, it was disclosed that Allred was under investigation for ethical misconduct by the California Bar Association.
Although many media outlets have reported Ms. Young Nelson as the fifth potential victim, only two women have alleged any illegal behavior by Judge Moore. All claims are approximately 40 years old and lack any physical evidence proving the alleged victims’ accounts. Because of the difficulty in proving or disproving these types of allegations, and the fact that none of the women made any public complaints until the past week, the trial of Judge Moore in the court of public opinion has been a classic case of credibility and character.
As in all other cases where there is no physical evidence present, no one will ever find out the truth of these allegations with absolute certainty. Women who might have been the victims of sexual assault deserve to be treated with respect, but so too do those who stand accused in cases where everything hinges on the word of one person against another.
Cowardly politicians like Republican National Senatorial Committee chairman Cory Gardner and media talking heads are choosing to believe the word of the accusers rather than Moore, which is convenient given that they already intensely disliked Moore before the allegations of sexual misconduct became known. But as in any trial, when a defendant's character is a key point in the case, the defendant must be permitted to present character evidence that contradicts the accuser's accounts.
To this purpose, LifeSiteNews was able to contact a man who has personally known and worked for Chief Justice Moore for over fifteen years. It should be noted that this man is a fellow attorney, a devoted Christian husband and father and a personal friend of mine who I trust and respect.
Ben DuPré first worked for Judge Moore in 2001 as a law clerk during the judge’s first term as Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court. When Judge Moore was removed for standing up for the Ten Commandments, Mr. DuPré followed him to the Foundation for Moral Law. Finally, when Judge Moore was elected to the Chief Justice seat in the Alabama Supreme Court in 2012, Mr. DuPré became his Chief of Staff in charge of hiring and managing all the staff for the Chief Justice. Mr. DuPré is now an attorney in Montgomery and no longer works for Roy Moore or his campaign.
Mr. DuPré describes Judge Moore as “not a modern politician but rather a statesman” and a “good, good man.” “If there is a characteristic that would describe Judge Moore, it is honesty,” stated Mr. DuPré.
Besides the two cases alleging sexual assault, the majority of the accusers’ testimonies against Judge Moore hinge on the allegation that he dated older teenagers when he was in his early thirties. While this might seem shocking to us, we can all think of examples in our own families where one of the partners was in his or her late teens and the other was ten or more years older. That, in fact, is the case with my own parents. In the case of Judge Moore, there is a perfectly reasonable explanation as to why he might have dated young women in their late teens when he was in his early thirties.
In 1977, Judge Moore was a new Assistant District Attorney in Gadsen, Alabama and was thirty years old. He had graduated from West Point, fought for his country in Vietnam, attended law school and then returned to Gadsen to settle down. According to the US Census Bureau, in the 1970s, the median age for a woman’s first marriage was around 20-21 years old. It is not surprising or unusual in any way therefore that a young man like him, who had been in the military and in school during his twenties, and was still single at 30 would have had dates with young women in their late teenage years. The meaning of the term “date” in 1970s Alabama was also significantly different than it is today. In 1970, to date would not have implied sexual relations, but rather would have been seen as courtship. Eventually, Judge Moore met his first and current wife Kayla Moore and married her when she was 23 years old with one child from a previous marriage and he was 38. Subsequently Judge Moore adopted his wife's first child and had three more children with her.
Mr. DuPré told LifeSiteNews that Judge Moore and his wife were very close and were often seen together. “In all of the years that I worked for Judge Moore I never once saw him even disrespect a woman, and as Chief Justice he would interact with a great number of women. In fact, usually if he had a meeting with a woman he would try to include someone else in order to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, much like Vice President Mike Pence has stated is his practice. My office at the Supreme Court was situated in a way that I saw everyone that went in and out of his office, and never once did I see anything suspicious or improper. As his Chief of Staff if anybody would have seen something suspicious, it would have been me. If any of the staff had been harassed or disrespected in any way, I would have heard about it. Nothing like that ever happened in the fifteen years I had the honor of working for Judge Moore.”
It is quite disturbing that as of the writing of this article, no one from the offices of the senators who have publicly denounced Judge Moore or of the journalists who have come out with the extremely damaging articles, has attempted to speak with Mr. DuPré or bothered to investigate the countless local positive character witnesses that know Judge Moore. As a result, Judge Moore has been publicly depicted as a caricature that coastal elites have of believing Christians, especially of white Christians from the South.
As shocking as the allegations have been to Mr. DuPré and those who know Judge Moore best, the logical inconsistencies and initial unreliability of the testimony have provided ample proof that assures them that Judge Moore is innocent and that the accounts of the alleged victims are not true.
Mr. DuPré pointed to the fact that two mutually inconsistent theories have been simultaneously put forth to explain why the accusers waited so long to come out with their stories. One explanation, cited by several of the women, is that they didn’t come forward with the stories because they feared that no one would believe them, since at the time, Judge Moore was an assistant district attorney. At the same time the media has widely reported that Judge Moore’s predilection for unusually young girls was “common knowledge.” If Judge Moore was in fact well known in the community as a potential predator, why would the women think that they would be doubted?
Additionally, if it is true that Judge Moore used his position of power to pursue his young victims, why is it that there are no accusations of this behavior from the time he was a circuit court judge and later Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court? If his modus operandi was to use his public office to threaten his victims, why didn’t he use his much greater power as a judge to continue the pathological pattern of abuse imagined by the media?
Mr. DuPré noted that after Judge Moore was removed for defending the Ten Commandments monument, his political fortunes were at a low point. He lost several primaries for the Republican nomination to the office of Governor, and he had no national clout. Why did the women not come forth then? What did they have to fear from someone who was seen as a political has-been?
Then there are the curious inconsistencies in the handwriting on the latest alleged victim's yearbook. Mr. DuPré, who has witnessed countless documents signed by Judge Moore, points out that the signature on the yearbook and some of the numbering is significantly different from Judge Moore's handwriting. Additionally, the yearbook is signed “Roy Moore”, when in fact Judge Moore always signs his name as Roy S. Moore.
Those who know Judge Roy Moore and who have interacted with him on a daily basis for many years do not believe the account of the alleged victims. While the testimony of Mr. DuPré and others who have known and worked with Judge Moore cannot definitively rule out wrongdoing on the part of Judge Moore, it certainly provides credible proof of his character for honesty, decency and professionalism.
The allegations against judge Roy Moore are very serious indeed, but so is our responsibility to the accused. Judge Roy Moore has put his reputation on the line numerous times for constitutional and moral principles that are widely disdained by the elites in cosmopolitan America. While it may now seem convenient for them to destroy the reputation of this man without bothering to give him the opportunity to defend himself, it should be noted that the rule of law and the presumption of innocence once destroyed, is destroyed for all. Those in the media and in politics who rush to convict Judge Roy Moore without caring to carefully examine the evidence or allow him to defend himself are doing a grave disservice to our country, our laws, and to the people of Alabama.
We can only hope that we never stand falsely accused and are forced to prove our innocence in a court of public opinion bent on our destruction.
Gualberto Garcia Jones is an attorney licensed to practice law in the Commonwealth of Virginia. He has represented pro-life advocates in state and federal courts including the United States Supreme Court.