Support Hyperallergic’s independent arts journalism. Become a Member »

Support Hyperallergic’s independent arts journalism.

The entryway of Yale Law School this morning (by and courtesy of Laurel Raymond)

One of the most haunting and remarkable phrases uttered by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford during her public testimony is now inscribed in the entryway of Yale Law School, alma mater to Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

“Indelible in the hippocampus is the laughter,” Dr. Blasey Ford articulated in her September 27 testimony. The professor of psychology spoke of the enduring effects of Brett Kavanaugh and Mark Judge’s assault, saying, “The uproarious laughter between the two, and their having fun at my expense … I was underneath one of them, while the two laughed.”

An anonymous artist spray-painted the unmissable homage to Dr. Christine Blasey Ford overnight in the entryway of Sterling Law, the law school’s main building. Yale Law student Laurel Raymond posted the image to her Twitter.

Raymond told Hyperallergic she did not see the stencil when she left the building at 5 pm last night, but it was there when she got to school at 8 am this morning, October 22.

“In the wake of the hearings, I think there’s still a lot of feelings of anger and betrayal at the law school,” Raymond told Hyperallergic. “Inside the school, the walls are papered with fliers that people have filled out with why they’re ‘demanding better’: better from the judiciary, better from [Yale Law School], better from our leaders, better for survivors. There’s still a lot of anger and disappointment in the halls. I think in particular, a lot of female students feel very fundamentally betrayed. But also very determined to make things better.”

The Latest

Jasmine Weber

Jasmine Weber is Hyperallergic's news editor. She is an artist and writer based in Brooklyn, particularly interested in Black art histories and visual culture....

4 replies on “A Tribute to Christine Blasey Ford Appears at the Entrance of Yale Law School”

  1. The laughter is toward that statement being in any way the truth of this single most conflicted, obtuse and scripted series of blunders I have ever had to listen to.

      1. Good Lies are always dressed in truth and must apply to the matter at hand. There is truth in the narrative generally because so many Women and Children ARE sexually attacked in our societies by Men. This is, sadly, true.
        This particular accusation, built around that general truth, is not corroborated by any other call but to the accusers ‘persuasion.’ ‘I believe’. Unfortunately, the accusers cited-in-evidence ‘best friend’ and two others specified, denied any knowledge at all of the evening and the event. Surrounding anomalies in her narrative including but not restricted to who is representing her and their role in political operations, the needs-to-be investigated reports of Family connections to deepstate, the parts of her statement clearly exposed (airplane anxieties/doors pertaining to sub letting/polygraph instruction) all point to a constructed narrative that fails due diligence. So, as juror, out here on the stages of life, and upon consideration of all evidence I have seen presented, I would say, she made up being personally attacked by the accused. Yes.

Comments are closed.