Which point did I concede to? Forgive me but your points are little unclear. Here is the last comment from you that seemed to contain sort of a point: "Seems to me a "checkered" past only "taints" a speaker or writer if you disagree with them, which by definition means your agreement or lack thereof is the issue, not said checkered past. And THAT was the point I was trying to make. "... 

To which I replied, "Past criminal history is ALWAYS relevant, no matter who it is", which you then suggested agrees with your "point". So it would seem that you and I agreed all along that Ms Moore's past IS relevant to her credibility, and I misunderstood. Sorry for the unneeded argument.