Skip to main content

View Diary: Prosser vs Bradley: Investigations Go Forth (211 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Witnesses say that she did!!! (0+ / 0-)

    I swear, why are so many so afraid to acknowledge that she was at her wit's end dealing with this asshole?

    He was a prick who repeatedly disrespected women and the Chief Justice. He and the other members who had come to the majority conclusion that the legislation passed to strip unions of rights was legit came into her office, determined to get a copy of the ruling in time to meet a deadline set by the legislature. Bradley and Chief Justice Abraamson stonewalled - the CJ said it might take her a month to write up her dissenting minority opinion.

    A verbal fight ensued. Bradley told Prosser to leave, and he didn't. She charged him with her fist or fists raised and he pushed her away - and at the same time he pushed her away, she was being pulled away by another justice in the room who scolded her, saying that this wasn't like her (Bradley). That's what the evidence shows us.

    The week before the legislature was set to re-pass the collective-bargaining provision, three of the four conservative justices were ready to issue a ruling reinstating the union law as originally passed. Prosser, on the other hand, wanted to wait longer, to avoid the appearance that the court was rushing their decision through. Prosser thought he had an agreement with liberal Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson to delay release of the opinion until Tuesday of the following week.

    As Monday arrived, there was no word from Abrahamson on whether the decision would be issued the next day. At 5:30 p.m., Prosser and the other conservative justices marched around the chambers, looking for Abrahamson, who was found in Justice Bradley’s office. Prosser stood outside Bradley’s door, talking to the justices in Bradley’s office. The discussion got heated, with Prosser expressing his lack of faith in Abrahamson’s ability to lead the Court.

    According to one witness, Bradley charged toward Prosser, shaking her clenched fist in his face. Another source says they were “literally nose to nose.” Prosser then put his hands up to push her away. As one source pointed out, if a man wants to push a woman who is facing him, he wouldn’t push her in the chest (unless he wants to face an entirely different criminal charge). Consequently, Prosser put his hands on Bradley’s shoulders to push her away, and in doing so, made contact with her neck.

    At that moment, another justice approached Bradley from behind and pulled her away from Prosser, saying, “Stop it, Ann, this isn’t like you.” Bradley then shouted, “I was choked!” Another justice present replied, “You were not choked.”

    •  Witnesses? (0+ / 0-)


      Witnesses say that she did!!!

      The article you quote in support of your statement:

      According to one witness, Bradley charged toward Prosser, shaking her clenched fist in his face.

      One unknown witness (of unknown motivation) suddenly equals "witnesses"?

      Your take on this may indeed be accurate.  Or it may not.  There is a lot of confusion and conflicting reports ... but you seem very prone to take Prosser's version as the factual one when there is reason to believe it may not be.

      •  Yes, witnesses (0+ / 0-)

        It's the only evidence we have. Multiple witnesses have described this event as her charging him with her fists raised.

        There are not "many conflicting reports". I understand that's the spin you;ve been fed, but it's not true. In fact, the one "conflict", whether or not she was choked or not, seems to have been resolved by the statement that she herself made which acknowledges that she wasn't in fact, choked - that she was pulled away from him before he could choke her.

        The other "versions" simply left off info. The version that supported her version of events simply left off the things that happened before his hands touched her neck area. They don't say that those things that are alleged to have happened didn't happen. The failure of them mentioning those things (or denying those things) makes a nonpartisan person who hasn't bought into the spin realize that they left off the things that would be exculpatory for Prosser.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site