Since day one, Roy Moore has unequivocally denied the allegations of decades-old sexual misconduct that have tarnished his Senate race.
While Democrats and the mainstream media are trying desperately to smear the GOP candidate and shame anyone who gives him the benefit of the doubt, some new evidence just blew a hole in the accusations.
One of Moore’s accusers, Leigh Corfman, claims that almost 40 years ago, Moore tried to initiate a sexual relationship with her while she was still a teenager.
Her accusations hinge on two points: First, that she was left alone with the then-32-year-old attorney Roy Moore during a family court case… and second, that she lived with her mother in Gadsden, Alabama, when Moore allegedly harassed her.
Both of those points have now been called into question. The Washington Post story that originally outlined the case against Moore appears have have left some major details out — details that bring new questions about the story itself.
“Regarding the original court hearing where Corfman says that Moore asked her for her number while Wells went inside the courtroom, the Post reported that it ‘confirmed that her mother attended a hearing at the courthouse in February 1979 through divorce records,’” explained Breitbart News.
That part is a known fact. There was a court hearing involving Leigh Corfman and her mother, Nancy Wells. However, the Post left out a glaring detail: It was a custody case involving the 14-year-old girl, which means that there’s a good chance Corfman was in the courtroom, not left with Moore.
Additionally, the entire point of that court hearing was to give custody of the teenager to her father. She went to live with him soon after, not at her mother’s Gadsden house as the allegations claim.
According to court records, Corfman’s father’s house was in a completely different town called Ohatchee.
“This would mean that from the court hearing on February 21, 1979, until Corfman was ordered to move to her father’s house, Moore would only have had 12 days, including the day of the court hearing, to have repeatedly called Corfman at her mother’s Gadsden house, arrange two meetings, and attempt another. Moore has strenuously denied the accusations,” reported Breitbart.
Oddly, the fact that there was a window of just over 10 days for all of the alleged incidents to have taken place was not raised by the Washington Post’s article. Even more strangely, the change of custody and living location is completely missing from the accounts of Moore’s accuser.
“Neither Corfman nor Wells publicly mentioned the change in custody during the critical period where Moore was said to have arranged meetings with Corfman outside her mother’s home,” stated Breitbart.
A skeptic might wonder why these seemingly major details were left out. It gets even more odd.
Not only do court records indicate that Corfman stopped living at her mother’s house during the time frame of the accusations, but details provided by the accuser simply don’t hold up to scrutiny.
For instance, Leigh Corfman claims that Moore secretly called her on her bedroom phone in her mother’s house to arrange a meeting. Remember, this was 1979, long before cell phones and even cordless home phones were commonplace.
“Wells, 71, says that her daughter did not have a phone in her bedroom during the period that Moore is reported to have allegedly called Corfman — purportedly on Corfman’s bedroom phone,” stated Breitbart.
On that apparently non-existent phone, the accuser claims she agreed to meet Moore at a specific intersection “around the corner” from her house… a house where she no longer lived.
Around the corner — remember that.
“The Post reports, ‘She says she talked to Moore on her phone in her bedroom, and they made plans for him to pick her up at Alcott Road and Riley Street, around the corner from her house,’” summarized Breitbart.
Problem: It isn’t anywhere near “around the corner” from her house.
“[T]hat intersection was almost a mile away from her mother’s house at the time and would have been across a major thoroughfare,” Breitbart continued.
Let’s be extremely clear: We don’t know with certainty whether the claims against Roy Moore are true or not. Neither does anyone else, except the people directly involved.
That is the point: When an accusation is made, the first rule of our society and our laws is that the accused are innocent until proven guilty.
What we do know is that the timing of these accusations is extremely odd. After decades of Moore in the public light, these claims emerged with only weeks left in a key election that the candidate seemed to be winning.
Facts should be independent of politics. In the Roy Moore controversy, however, politic seems to be overshadowing everything… and that alone should cause people to take a step back and take a hard look at what is happening.
Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter if you believe that there are more questions than answers in this case!