Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

Bryan Preston


June 20, 2014 - 9:26 am

In 1975, a court appointed Hillary Rodham (not yet married to Bill Clinton) to defend an accused child rapist. Clinton evidently took that case on with relish. According to the victim, a 12-year-old girl at the time, Clinton lied about her in court in order to get the rapist’s sentence drastically reduced.

Josh Rogin of the Daily Beast interviewed the victim.

The victim’s allegation that Clinton smeared her following her rape is based on a May 1975 court affidavit written by Clinton on behalf of Thomas Alfred Taylor, one of the two alleged attackers, whom Clinton agreed to defend after being asked by the prosecutor. Taylor had specifically requested a female attorney.

“I have been informed that the complainant is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and engage in fantasizing,” Clinton, then named Hillary D. Rodham, wrote in the affidavit. “I have also been informed that she has in the past made false accusations about persons, claiming they had attacked her body. Also that she exhibits an unusual stubbornness and temper when she does not get her way.”

Clinton also wrote that a child psychologist told her that children in early adolescence “tend to exaggerate or romanticize sexual experiences,” especially when they come from “disorganized families, such as the complainant.”

The victim vigorously denied Clinton’s accusations and said there has never been any explanation of what Clinton was referring to in that affidavit. She claims she never accused anyone of attacking her before her rape.

The victim’s statement squares up well with an assessment of Clinton by someone else who came into professional contact with her in a completely different setting. Clinton worked as a staffer on the Watergate investigation. Her supervisor, lifelong Democrat Jerry Zeifman, fired her from that job “Because she was a liar. She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

In the rape case, Clinton seems to have exhibited similar behavior.

The 1975 case sheds considerable light on the character of Hillary Clinton. Lawyers are charged with defending their clients to the best of their ability, within the law and the bounds of ethics, whether they believe their clients are guilty or not. Tapes discovered University of Arkansas by the Washington Free Beacon reveal that Clinton knew that her client was guilty. She chuckled about getting him a light sentence for child rape.

Defending him not only did not require her to lie on his behalf, if the victim’s statement is accurate, Clinton’s actions were unethical and illegal.

Hillary Clinton claims to be both a champion of children and of women. But she was willing to lie in court to save a rapist — he was convicted of a lesser charge thanks to Clinton’s maneuvers — who had victimized a young girl. This was Hillary Clinton at the foundation of her career.

Clinton must have more to hide. One of her major donors has banned the Free Beacon from the University of Arkansas archive where the damning tapes were discovered.

Bryan Preston has been a leading conservative blogger and opinionator since founding his first blog in 2001. Bryan is a military veteran, worked for NASA, was a founding blogger and producer at Hot Air, was producer of the Laura Ingraham Show and, most recently before joining PJM, was Communications Director of the Republican Party of Texas.

Comments are closed.

All Comments   (4)
All Comments   (4)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Whoa, Nelly.
Young attorneys take the cases that come their way, mostly. They need track records to get ahead, just like people in any profession. So when they take cases, they go all in.
This is also expected and required by legal canons. A defense attorney in particular has a duty to the defendant, not to justice and certainly not to the accuser. That's true regardless of age.
Many of us have commented on the problem of false or overstated claims of sexual misconduct on campuses. Well, some of that goes on with teens and pre-teens as well. A diligent defense attorney would do what Clinton did: impugn the accuser to get the best outcome for her client. An attorney would do that as part of the canon requirement, to earn the fee, and I'm sure from the competitive element that is part of legal practice.
Clinton is a nasty piece of work and she was probably a nasty piece of work when she took this case. But this case isn't the proof of it.
35 weeks ago
35 weeks ago Link To Comment
Rodham lied under oath. That is well outside the cannon of eithics.

Putting aside this instance of perjury when defending a rapist, Hillary Clinton has made her way up the political ladder by enabling another rapist.
35 weeks ago
35 weeks ago Link To Comment
We're fighting a war and you want to be fair? No wonder we're losing.
35 weeks ago
35 weeks ago Link To Comment
Move along here nothing to see. Dude that was like decades ago. She has been straightforward and honest ever since. Count on it. That leopard changed its stripes.
35 weeks ago
35 weeks ago Link To Comment
View All