We've seen it all before. Someone accuses a prominent public figure of sexual misconduct. The public figure denies the allegations. The case plays out in public for all who are interested to see.
In case you missed it:
Click here for story: Police Reopen Al Gore Case
And of course:
Click here for story: Gore "emphatically" denies "unwanted sexual contact" claim
What always interests me is the emphasis the accused puts on their on denial. Gore EMPHATICALLY and UNEQUIVOCALLY denies the allegations. Usually, the level of emphasis is directly proportional to the level of guilt. The more guilty the accused, the greater the emphasis on the denial.
It makes me think about what I used to do as a kid. If I took a cookie out of the jar and my mom questioned my siblings and I, I always denied it emphatically. If I didn't take the cookie, I would just say "No, I didn't take it."
So this makes me question Gore's denial. Why not just say "the allegations are false"? Instead of UNEQUIVOCALLY and EMPHATICALLY denying it. The more he forcefully he denies, the more guilty he appears.
As a point of reference, remember this?
Algore has learned from his former boss: deny, deny, deny. And then deny some more. And when you are done denying, deny again, and again, and again. Until a blue dress with an incriminating stain is found.
So do I think Algore did it? YOU BETCHA!