During the debacle that was the confirmation process for now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Democrats brought forward several anonymous, unsubstantiated, and unverifiable allegations of sexual misconduct from decades ago against the then-nominee, including an evidence-free allegation of violent rape inside a vehicle by a woman known only as “Jane Doe from Oceanside, California.”
But as that and the other allegations never panned out, Kavanaugh was ultimately confirmed to the Court — and now the Senate Judiciary Committee has referred for prosecution a “left-wing activist” who falsely attempted to portray herself as the “Jane Doe” in order to derail Kavanaugh’s confirmation.
That criminal referral was revealed in a letter sent Friday from committee chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) to Attorney General Jeff Sessions and FBI Director Christopher Wray. In it, Grassley recommended that a woman named Judy Munro-Leighton be investigated and prosecuted.
Specifically, Grassley wanted Munro-Leighton to be investigated and prosecuted for making “materially false statements” to the committee and for “obstruction” of their own investigative efforts with regard to the allegations against the nominee.
She wasn’t really “Jane Doe from Oceanside”
The handwritten “Jane Doe” letter was first produced to the committee by Democrat California Sen. Kamala Harris on Sept. 25, and led to under oath testimony from Kavanaugh the very next day about the allegations contained therein, which he categorically denied. A transcript of that interview and the letter that prompted it were released to the public later on Sept. 26.
On Oct. 3, the committee received an email from Munro-Leighton in which she claimed to be “Jane Doe from Oceanside” and reiterated the allegation against Kavanaugh. That, of course, prompted committee investigators to delve into the woman and her claim, upon which they quickly discovered that Munro-Leighton “(1) is a left-wing activist; (2) is decades older than Judge Kavanaugh; and (3) lives in neither the Washington DC area nor California, but in Kentucky.”
Efforts to make further contact with Munro-Leighton were then unsuccessful until nearly a month later, on Nov. 1, when committee investigators finally got the chance to interview Munro-Leighton over the phone. During that conversation, she admitted that she was not “Jane Doe from Oceanside,” did not write the letter she had sought credit for, and had not ever been raped by Kavanaugh — she’d never even met him.
Pressed for why she had done what she did, Munro-Leighton admitted “(1) she ‘just wanted to get attention’; (2) ‘it was a tactic’; and (3) ‘that was just a ploy,’” Grassley wrote. She further admitted that she had called Congress several times previously to register her opposition to Kavanaugh’s nomination, prior even to any allegations of sexual misconduct arising, and that she had decided to falsely portray herself as “Jane Doe” because she had been “angry.”
Intentionally misled the committee
“The Committee is grateful to citizens who come forward with relevant information in good faith, even if they are not one hundred percent sure about what they know,” Grassley wrote. “But when individuals intentionally mislead the Committee, they divert Committee resources during time-sensitive investigations and materially impede our work.”
“Such acts are not only unfair; they are potentially illegal,” he added. “It is illegal to make materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements to Congressional investigators. It is illegal to obstruct Committee investigations.”
This “left-wing activist” who was opposed to Justice Kavanaugh’s nomination from the start attempted to gain attention for herself by falsely latching on to the anonymous and vague allegations of sexual misconduct that arose out of the ether against the nominee.
Unfortunately for her, her ruse was quickly discovered by committee investigators, and now her misguided “ploy” has been referred to federal investigators from the Department of Justice and FBI, who hopefully will hold her accountable for her deceptive actions.