The legal team for Dr. Christine Blasey Ford on Wednesday shot down the Senate Judiciary Committee’s request to turn over evidence related to Ford’s therapy sessions and the polygraph test she took, saying that the FBI has not contacted them for an interview. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has already issued a response.
Earlier in the day, Ford attorneys Debra Katz and Lisa Banks said the following in a letter to Grassley: “Regarding the documents you have requested in your letter of October 2, 2018, Dr. Ford is prepared to provide those documents to the FBI when is interviewed.”
“We have not yet heard from the FBI about scheduling an interview with her,” they added. In case you missed it, Senate Republicans decided, and the White House approved, last Friday of a one-week FBI investigation into claims made against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
That investigation has apparently, up to now, not included interviews of Ford or Kavanaugh. Ford has accused Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her at party over the summer of 1982. Bloomberg reported that the White House “indicated to the FBI” that Kavanaugh and Ford’s testimony from Thursday of last week is “sufficient.”
“It’s disappointing that Dr. Ford’s attorneys were willing to share evidence with The Washington Post many weeks ago but to this day refuse to share the same evidence, which Dr. Ford relied on in her testimony, with the Senate,” Grassley responded Wednesday afternoon.
The evidence Grassley is referring to relates to the first known reference of the alleged assault, reportedly made during a 2012 couples therapy session. Ford’s husband Russell recalled that she named Brett Kavanaugh as her attacker.
On Tuesday, Grassley said that these documents are “highly relevant” and asked for them to be handed over.
“The Washington Post reported that some notes were provided to the Post, and Dr. Ford’s testimony indicated that these notes were highly relevant to her allegations,” Grassley said. “These notes have been repeatedly cited as corroboration even while written 30 years after the alleged event and in apparent contradiction with testimony and other public statements regarding several key details of the allegations.”
[Image via Michael Reynolds-Pool/Getty Images]
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
Follow Law&Crime:
