If Ed Murray molested anyone, he needs to be brought to justice. If this is a conspiracy, it needs to be unmasked. But I think I speak for all Seattle when I say...god I really really really didn't want to know anything about the mayor's scrotum. And whoever is the unspeakably evil person, whether a child molester or a slanderer, making sack moles newsworthy is going to send them to an extra-deep pit of hell.
It's so awful that it is coming down to prurient level and that we have to read about such details. I feel so sorry for the mayor and what he must be going through.
I agree.

Who the duck is DH?
Reveal yourself!
Tell us who you are and you how you got hooked up with this lawyer. Maybe your priest suggested you needed counseling?

I did not have much of a lunch today. I am tired and hungry, and this would not have been my choice of dinner reading.
I hope the lawyers get disciplined for spreading those lies and other misconduct.
I was born in WA and until I was about 23 years old attempting to have same sex relations was a crime. Up to just a few years ago you could be evicted from your home or fired from your job if your landlord or boss thought you were gay. Thanks to heroic pioneers of gay liberation like Ed Murray and the late Senator Cal Anderson we are close to enjoying equal rights. P.S. I told you so!
"Bright red pubic hair" though. Woof!
Moles in delicate regions can be removed. A friend told me.

D.H. needs to come out of his moneygrubbing closet or admit it's a hoax and go away. I suspect he is a republican hoax, inspired by #45.
It's R attack on lib Dem Mayor who supports sanctuary cities.

What is DH story how he came to "hire" lawyer?
I notice that the doctor's report doesn't precisely address D.H.'s claim.
The lawsuit reads "... a unique mole on his scrotum -- it is a small bump".
The pertinent part of the doctor's notes read: "... No testicular masses or lumps ... No dermatologic lesions such as a mole, freckle or keratosis present on the penis or scrotum. ...".
So the doctor addresses testicular lumps, and penile and scrotal lesions. But doesn't address scrotal lumps/bumps. Could he have a small non-discolored bump that is not technically a "mole" or lesion?
I had a mole removed once, as a skin cancer precaution. It wasn't on my scrotum, which I don't have, but I'm just saying.

The man who said he came forward all these years later because his father recently died and he felt free rings true to me. I know a woman who was raped by a very famous man who went public almost three years ago, and she's 74. There are reasons people don't come forward about such a humiliating and painful trauma in their lives. Where there's smoke, there's usually fire.

But more importantly, WHO'S CHALLENGING HIZZONER? Seattle needs a seriously innovative mayor.
All these people who are complaining about all the details you have to read, no, you don't have to read them, and really, it's not about you. Get outside of your fragile self for a minute.
For fux sake.
It's likely a right wing plot against of those dirty tricks Nixonian have heard of Nixon? Roger Stone was a Nixon guy and now buddies with Trump.

There are no facts.
If plaintiff had any real facts Murray would have already resigned.
Mayor Ed Murray has my deepest sympathy.
@13: You nailed it.
@10, a soft-tissue bump or lump could be termed a lesion.
The fact remains that the two men who did not file suit did talk about their claims at the time; one at least contacted the police.
And you are working for the Trump team? Using this poor fool DH to create a case? Well done, sir!
Ok, now we've moved from Gus Van Sant territory to the Second Act of a John Water's film.

Personally, it feels more like we've skipped over John Waters and gone straight into Bobby Garcia territory...
@20, that's too much of a deep cut for me...
I have no opinion one way or the other, though the account does sound genuine on its face.
If it is a "right wing plot" though, why would they guess at a mole/bump on his scrotum? Seems like a guaranteed way to have the case dismissed.
On the other hand, if the claim is genuine, he could have had the mole removed long ago with no scarring (I've had skin tags removed, no trace at all), or it could be that with a better description from the plaintiff, an independent doctor could find a lump that matched.
That's a headline for the ages...
D.H. "unique mole on his scrotum—it is a small bump"
Anderson "unusual bump on his penis"
Are we supposed to think penis and scrotum are close enough that these are not inconsistent claims?

And what does it even say that he doesn't have it, why not have it removed, especially if it *had* previously been referred to in a complaint?

This whole thing is a total shitshow in all directions.
(And as previously mentioned, so what if somebody does know features of his junk, what does that say beyond that some past partner was willing to talk?)
Given his background, I doubt D.H. did this to make some high-minded political statement, he probably just wanted to get paid. The attorneys instead went nuclear to create maximum political humiliation for their own purposes, killing any chance of a settlement for their client. Game over.
It's a PR attack and a PR defense. I guess that tells you more about the attacker, who chose the type of battlefield, than about the defender who responded there.
Why are you all so convinced the conspiracy is coming from the right? The mayor has pissed off a lot of people on the far left the past year. If it were the right, they'd have a viable candidate ready to go-- they don't. Look who announced their candidacy two weeks ago...
I wish Donald Trump was capable of feeling just a fraction of the humiliation (undeserved or otherwise) that Ed Murray is having to endure right now.
Because the right is smarter than the left when it comes to being assholes.
I've had a couple of skin things removed for cancer precaution, too - though not on the genitals. It left scars. My guess is that it'd be even more likely to leave scars on the genitals since the skin is much more sensitive. But I guess doctors would know, right?

In any case, people are innocent until proven guilty and I have to wonder about court rules that keep adult accuser identities so secret that even the accused and their attorney doesn't know the identities of people involved.

How can they properly investigate for their own case and defense? That sounds unconstitutional.

Frankly, in the case of adults, I also wonder about their identities being secret from the public.

Yeah, it can't be fun, but if an accuser is telling the truth, IMO, they just have to 'bite the bullet' and come out with it.
The statement about "no bump, etc." was from Murray's doctor, not a doctor with no connection to either party.
The Seattle times story of multiple independent similar accounts of abuse by a man who once wanted to be a priest, accompanied by his use of campaign funds to demean alleged victims.....Is much more compelling than this nonsense.

Murray, you don't have to resign at the moment, but for the good of Seattle don't run a reelection campaign.
if it wasn't Ed Murray, who was it? Let's mount a search! It was a one-bumped man - you find that man! #thefugitive #findtherealrapist

Pick up a copy of Waters' "Role Models".
Dunno @ 19
Life is indeed an ongoing John Waters movie.

I wouldn't count on a national level conspiracy theory, but wouldn't rule out the possibility of a local one.
If Murray was abusive he needs to be accountable. That said, would a man in his 20's having sex with teenage girls would make the news, let alone a John Waters movie?

The mayor hasn't denied knowing DH.

I guess you were unable to read the entire post, especially the second to last paragraph.
@38, I think you meant "Genital Mole Models."
Why not just publish photos of the Mayor's privates and we can all debate mole/no mole in the comments?
I did not vote for Murray and doubt I will in the future, but this story seemed sketchy from the start. I know we live in a time and place that loves to repeat the mantra "Always believe the victim" but people do lie. And any gay man of a certain age knows that the easiest charge to toss out is "Had sex with young boys" to get people to believe it. Our history of homophobia is not over yet.

I also have a rather bitter homophobic taste in my mouth from other mayoral candidates who send out press releases saying they will not politicize this and will not take a stand and then spend another three paragraphs doing just that. Doesn't exactly come off as gay friendly or supportive to me. I'll remember that when I mark my ballot.
@43: is that what happens if this goes to court? Is the jury expected to take the doctor's word for it, or are they expected to carefully examine photos (or even the actual mayor)?
what #1 conferences about exculpatory genitals? that's how this is going to go? seriously? and someone thinks this is GOOD political strategy? this is hardly a "game changer"--its actually pretty vile and politically maybe this is what they feel they need to do, but good god, politically tone deaf. this is a game changer to no one except those who have already made up their minds.
myself @ 39
"That said, would a man in his 20's having sex with teenage girls would make the news, let alone a John Waters movie?”
My sincere apologies to Mr. Waters. In “Female Trouble” Devine is a teenage girl running away from home on Christmas day. She is picked up by a man, Devine in ‘their’ first male appearance on screen, and later have sex, possibly rape, on a huge garbage pile in a dump site.
Oh now "Matt Hickey Is Innocent" is here. This comment thread is done.
I find it shady that Mayor Murray has his dermatological exam performed by a GASTROENTEROLOGIST (Craig Pepin, MD)! Why not his DERMATOLOGIST? He's old and has unusually pale, putty rosacea pocked skin, so you know he's probably seen a Dermatologist for decades. I'd like a statement from his Dermatologist saying he's never had anything removed in his groin. Or, has he had some work done to remove odd moles? It's certainly probable at his age.
what makes a mole 'unique' ? are any two exactly the same?

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.