A Nightmare of False Accusation That Could Happen to You

[Xilantro]

By ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ
Jan. 14, 2015 7:14 p.m. ET

Imagine the following situation: You’re a 76-year-old man, happily married for nearly 30 years, with three children and two grandchildren. You’ve recently retired after 50 years of teaching at Harvard Law School. You have an unblemished personal record, though your legal and political views are controversial. You wake up on the day before New Year’s Eve to learn that two lawyers have filed a legal document that, in passing, asserts that 15 years ago you had sex on numerous occasions and in numerous locations with an underage female.

The accusation doesn’t mention the alleged victim’s name—she’s referred to as Jane Doe #3, and the court document includes no affidavit by her. But her name doesn’t really matter, because you have never had sex with anyone other than your wife during the relevant time period. The accusations against you are totally false, and you can prove it.

Well, that is my situation: I’m the one who has been falsely accused. But let’s continue to imagine it was you:

Your first instinct is to call your lawyer and have him file a denial to the court in which the accusation was made. But your lawyer informs you that you can’t do that because you’re not a party to the lawsuit (against the United States government seeking to vacate the plea bargain your client struck seven years earlier) and have no standing to file any papers.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/alan-m-dershowitz-a-nightmare-of-false-accusation-that-could-happen-to-you-1421280860

[niyad]

1. pooor alan. my widdle heart bleeds for him.

[COLGATE4]

2. Like him or not, he does have a point about having

to try and contest unfounded charges made by an anonymous individual. The only break he gets is that England has much stricter libel laws than we have here, and he may be able to get some redress in the courts there - assuming the accusation to be false.

[OKNancy]

3. as he wrote: it could happen to you

[niyad]

4. it could. still don't have a great deal of sympathy for that jerk.

[1monster]

6. He doesn't need your sympathy. We need to make sure that he, as a representative of

of all of us has the legal right to redress in this sort of case. From what I've read about this case, some law firm, that sounds like the kind of ambulance chasing shysters from which come lawyer jokes, are throwing mud at as many different well-known figures as they can, leaving the accused but not charged no recourse to defend themselves.

It doesn't take much to utterly destroy a reputation -- and often no proof is required for that.

[niyad]

7. all good and noble points, to be sure. however, my view of his reputation has always had him

somewhere near the bottom of the cesspool.

[1monster]

8. Woosh!

[chervilant]

5. "...during the relevant time period."

Is that a legalese disclaimer in case he had sex with other women at other "irrelevant" time periods?

And, why link to WSJ, when you must join or pay to view the article?

I wonder if Dershowitz denies any contact with Jeffrey Epstein...

[geek tragedy]

9. A person could also be tortured or have their

entire nation living under military occupation. But that's okay by Big Al.