I released Training Minds University Class #2 today, “Reversing the Burden.” It’s quite a persuasive technique, one that Roy Moore should use right now. Or else he’s toast.
Moore is being accused by four women of inappropriate behavior dating 40 years back, one accusation of an attempt to rape. Evidence is being presented on social media, one of a yearbook signing by Moore himself, and one woman is volunteering to testify under oath. Moore’s response has been to deny the claims, but his reasoning has been found to be contradictory and weak. At least as far as persuasion goes.
Let me be clear: I have no idea whether Roy Moore is innocent or guilty. No one does. Not the media or the lawyers or Alabama voters. For better or for worse (I lean to the latter), guilt will be decided in the court of public opinion, not on the facts.
But the facts seem to be what Roy Moore is appealing to, and the facts (at this time) are against him.
I watched his short appearance on CNN last night where he denied the allegations, denied knowing “the woman,” and denied even knowing “of that restaurant.” (What restaurant? I thought. These were details he was revealing, details that were either unimportant or that no one was thinking about.) I then watched his wife make a sincere attempt to appeal to her husband’s reputation, that she has known him for 32 years, post-dating the testimony of his accusers. The admission was plain as day. I then watched the two retreat to a firehouse without answering any media questions.
Again, I have no idea of guilt. But, do I have an idea in the world of persuasion? I sure do. Moore scored a big, fat zero.
This follows a Sean Hannity interview from last week, one that was Moore’s first attempt to clear his name. I listened to Moore say it was “probably untrue” that he dated a 14-year-old, that he only recalls knowing these girls’ parents, and that he didn’t remember much of anything. The interview was filled with contradictions and second-takes. Again, a big, fat zero. Arguably a negative.
The burden of proof is clearly on Judge Moore, and he seems to be hardly up for the challenge. His defense is filled with contradictions and he’s failing to answer any of the questions the public has about the accusations.
This would be a perfect time to “reverse the burden,” my lesson released this morning to TMU members. The burden to prove guilt or innocence should not be on the defendant; it should be on the accuser. There are plenty of suspicions to go around, most of which has to do with the undeniably horrible timing of the allegations. Why is this coming out 20 days before a major election? Why isn’t the Department of Justice investigating? Why should anyone believe the Washington Post?
These are called “tactical questions,” the types of questions the Moore campaign should be asking. These are the questions that, if I were a Moore supporter in Alabama, I’d wish Moore would be asking. Instead, we’re getting denials and contradictions, as if that will persuade me at all.
You may think that “reversing the burden of proof” is a sly tactic I’m suggesting Moore use to wiggle out of his immoral ways. I beg to differ. Our Founding Fathers reversed the burden that plagued the Crown of immorality for centuries when they claimed—and wrote into our founding documents—that the accuses must always be “innocent until proven guilty.”
That’s the American way, and that’s how Alabama voters would be persuaded.