Truth is not reliant on opinion. Whether we choose to believe something is true is not determinative of whether or not it IS true. Just because I declare that I can't believe a fact not clearly supported by evidence, does not make it untrue. Likewise my declaration "I believe it!" (or him, or her, or them), will not make something true that is not.

Therein lies the necessity for evidence when determining accountability. It is the very reason for the presumption of innocence rather than guilt. The spectacle of our "judiciary committee" this week should alarm every citizen who believes in our most basic rule of law.

A justice confirmation hearing is an "advise and consent" (or not) hearing for someone who has proven his knowledge of the rule of law and its execution. It is not, or rather it should not be an opportunity for an undignified display of juvenile "did not"/ "did too" bickering.

My opinion is but one of the millions posted, or tweeted, or shouted in hallways and elevators. I am not deluded by the assumption that anyone cares at all what I think. - Still, just like the millions that offer theirs, I will share mine and hope there are some who will hear the message.

I am a conservative. I define myself as such because I believe in conserving the content of our Constitution. If there is a single elected official who is not honoring the oath they pledged to uphold the Constitution, that official should be sanctioned. If there is a single elected official who has betrayed their oath, they are in violation of their oath and should be removed from office. The liberty that our founding fathers fought for is not high minded nor is it's objective too difficult to comprehend.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

1 "more perfect" Union

2 Establish Justice

3 Tranquility

4 Defense

5 general Welfare

6 Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity {posterity: 1) all offspring of a given progenitor 2) all future generations}

Oh, the evil patriarchal influences of those historical ancestors who signed that sacred document! Historically, women have been excluded and oppressed. Women deserve respect. Women deserve equal pay for equal work. All these things are true. Women can do anything a man can do as well or better than a man. The truth is some can and some can't. Some women view equality to men as validation; others, like me, don't require equality with men to be validated. My validation comes from a much higher source.

Apparently, the fate of being born with the anatomy of a woman, in addition to the historical inequalities of such a fate, entitles us to the "right" to be believed. I will, however, attempt to explain why this is deceptive, insincere, contrary to the establishment of justice, - and dangerous to all.

The #meToo movement is dictating that unless we all believe Dr. Ford's uncorroborated testimony that Judge Kavanaugh at the estimated age of 17 years old attempted to rape her, we are discrediting their personal experience of abuse. This claim is utterly absurd.

There is a reason that corroborating evidence is critically important and necessary for the achievement of establishing justice. We are emotional people with passionate beliefs. Our beliefs and perspectives can be present in the DNA of our personality traits, as well as developed through our personal experiences. Justice, however, is supposed to be dispassionate and fair.

Senator Hirono claims that women have the right to be heard and to be believed. I have very personal experience with being "believed." A woman judge recited to me, the very words that people like the senator from Hawaii claim "must" be declared.

After a bench trial and hearing my victim impact statement, the judge - on the record stated, "Miss Bozek, just for the record, no one felt that you were lying or not telling the truth in any way, shape, or form." The prosecuting attorney followed with his remarks. "Well, you know, Melinda, it's very true, that we - - I think we've met twice in my office, and at least three times, and talked about this case, went over the facts of the case, and believe she substantially testified to the same things that she told me at my office, and I've gotta say that I believe that she believes everything that she said, and I also have to say that at no point do I - - she might be minimizing about some things, but I certainly don't think that she is a liar, and I know that she has gone through a hell that most people will never have to experience...."

Can I hear an AMEN? - That's the way it's supposed to be!

Not so fast. You see, my testimony (that everyone "claimed" to believe), in addition to the testimony of our son, my husband's lifelong friend, and his former female colleague and superior were contrary to the desired objective and agenda. The court evidently found the support of my entire family for me and the defendant was irrelevant. Those multiple meetings in which I participated with the assistant prosecutor were meetings in the effort to spare the taxpayer the expense of an unnecessary trial. I tried my best to convey to the state that they simply had it wrong. I gave the state the benefit of the doubt that it was an honest misunderstanding. I had it wrong. The state had no interest in the truth. The only interest was in getting the longest possible sentence they could. - which, by the way, is contrary to the purpose of felony sentencing according to the laws of my state.

Based on a concocted "theory" of what happened with enough of the truth woven into it to declare it as fact, the prosecutor's office "creatively" multiplied one event into two. It lacked, however, actual evidence to support it. Because, you know - I am a woman, he is a man - he is evil ...and I am to be believed. Double jeopardy be damned.

Prosecution for the crime was not sufficient. Persecution was required. Whether prompted by agenda, personal animosity or bias, or a genuine misunderstanding of what happened, the result was the same - injustice. On appeal, the attorney for the state explained its proposed theory of the defendant's actions. I cannot describe the sense of relief when at last I finally heard one of the three appellate judges - on the record interrupt, "There is no evidence of that."

Evidence matters. The prosecutor can opine that I mis-remembered or "minimized" what happened. I can assert that the court and the prosecutor were politically or agenda driven. I can argue that the judge has become jaded from the testimonies of all the previous cases she's heard. Opinions and assertions are not evidence, and claims are not proof.

Evidence matters. It matters because like it or not, absent evidence people will likely choose to accept that which aligns with what they want to believe. In an effort to right the wrongs of the past when women were afraid to come forward because they would not be believed, we are at risk of persecuting rather than establishing justice - and administering it fairly.

My name is "Mrs. Bozek" - not "Miss" Bozek, as court chose to address me. The distinction between the two is revealing. "Miss" psychologically separates me from my husband, but we are one, - united in holy matrimony. "Believe" that. I am married to the defendant. His punishment is my punishment.

WE agree. If one commits a crime, one should expect to receive to be prosecuted for the crime committed. WE did not believe the state should bear the expense. WE believed in the rule of law and that the evidence, and an impartial justice system. WE were sadly mistaken. Not all court proceedings are fair. Not all judges are impartial.

In the past year, I was a victim of a home invasion/burglary. My jaded view of the judicial system prompted me to be present for the defendants' hearings and sentencing. It was surprisingly refreshing. I am pleased that I had multiple opportunities to sit in a courtroom where I saw a judge genuinely interested in justice. I highly suggest that everyone take a "field trip" to their local courtroom and determine for themselves whether they find the judges and prosecutors worthy of serving the community.

Angry women and weak men are attempting to alter the rule of law. Rather than requiring evidence of one's guilt, they demand the accused to disprove the accusation. This disregard for the rule of law - even within our courts, should disturb every citizen. The fact that you haven't committed a crime - and plan never to do so is no longer an argument one can rely on to justify "staying out of it."

Citizens who find excuses to not serve on juries, those who avoid staying informed on political issues and candidates because of the cesspool it has become, those who neglect to vote because "one vote isn't going to make a difference" or "I don't register to vote because I don't want to be called for jury duty," - you may want to reconsider.

Women with fathers, husbands, sons, brothers or other men/young men should be deeply concerned with how easily they could be unjustly accused. Make your voices heard. Don't allow your concerns to be ignored or discredited. Have conversations about their interpersonal relationships - or even interactions with others. Make certain they understand the risks that they face in today's #metoo climate.

Men with mothers, wives, daughters or other females should certainly pursue justice if they have been violated. Stand up for them. Support them. Do this by helping them forward so that evidence can be collected and preserved that can support their allegations. Be honest about the difficulty and honest about why waiting to report is detrimental to their case, should they choose to pursue it in the future.

Justice should be everyone's objective.

ALL should be mindful that evidence is critical in the genuine pursuit of justice.

Proof of innocence rather than guilt is contrary to law. It is a genuine disservice to victims to mislead them into believing there is no need to report they've experienced a crime against them. It is unreasonable to expect that unreported, decades old, assaults with no verifiable evidence should go unquestioned.

Encouraging the belief that all unreported violations of the past should be brought forward and prosecuted - when there is no way to obtain corroborating evidence, has the potential of causing tremendous damage to both the victim and the accused.

Our justice system is not perfect. We've been told it is the best in the world. Not everyone views "appropriate" justice in the same light. Crimes are personal, emotions influence our thoughts on unfair judgments and sentences that we believe are too light or too excessive. It is an imperfect system which will become worse if people of integrity do not participate or pay attention to the direction this is going.

Pay attention. One day you may be very sorry if you choose to "just stay out of it."