In an interview that aired Friday with ABC News, Beverly Young Nelson, the woman who alleged that Roy Moore sexually assaulted her at age 16, admitted that she added a note underneath the Roy Moore inscription in her high school yearbook. Nelson provided the yearbook in a press conference last month as proof that she knew Moore. And Nelson’s lawyer Gloria Allred appeared to inaccurately attribute all of the
In an interview that aired Friday with ABC News, Beverly Young Nelson, the woman who alleged that Roy Moore sexually assaulted her at age 16, admitted that she added a note underneath the Roy Moore inscription in her high school yearbook. Nelson provided the yearbook in a press conference last month as proof that she knew Moore. And Nelson’s lawyer Gloria Allred appeared to inaccurately attribute all of the writing to Moore.
If you look at the photo below, there is a clear difference between the script used to write the words “To a sweeter more beautiful girl I could not say ‘Merry Christmas.’ Christmas 1977. Love, Roy Moore, D. A. » and the one used to write the words that follow: « 12-22-77 Olde Hickory House.” It also wouldn’t make sense for one writer to have written the date twice.
It would be very significant if the yearbook inscription were proven to be a forgery—it would be a sign that Nelson was out to get Moore and willing to lie in order to do so. As noted in last week’s issue of THE WEEKLY STANDARD: « The Moore campaign also alleges that the signature was lifted from a court filing. Moore’s campaign claims the letters ‘D. A.’ don’t stand for ‘district attorney’ (Moore was assistant D. A. at the time), but for the initials of his assistant, Delbra Adams, who would stamp the judge’s name on court documents and write her initials. »
Nelson and her lawyer Gloria Allred could’ve cleared this up somewhat had they earlier allowed a handwriting expert to test the age of the ink. Allred said she’d release the yearbook to the Senate if it held a hearing investigating Moore. But, as THE WEEKLY STANDARD noted last week, that was an odd offer, given the fact that the Senate would not have jurisdiction over the matter unless and until Moore wins and is seated.
So, as a matter of objective truth, Nelson’s admission by itself is not an admission of forgery and does not disprove her allegation. It does not discredit women who said that Moore dated and kissed them when they were 17 years old. Nor does it discredit the allegations by Leigh Corfman, who says that she was molested by Moore at the age of 14.
Corfman’s account, unlike Nelson’s, was backed up by contemporaneous accounts and journalistic vetting by the Washington Post. Efforts to poke holes in her story in the month since the Post published its original report have failed. But there’s no doubt that Moore and his allies will use this admission to cast doubt on all the accusations against him.
*As Holmes Lybrand points out, Fox News also inaccurately tweeted that Nelson admitted forgery (the tweet was later deleted). I went on Fox News this afternoon to talk about why Nelson’s admission did not prove the yearbook inscription was a forgery or discredit the accusations from other women:
