Rachel Mitchell, a Republican prosecutor from Arizona, arrives for a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 27. U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and a woman who accuses him of sexual assault will present dueling accounts of what happened—or didn't happen—36 years ago, as senators hold a historic hearing that will shape the court's future and redefine the “Me Too” era. Photo Credit: Jim Bourg/Pool via Bloomberg

Rachel Mitchell, in questioning the woman who has accused U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault, is playing the delicate role of a prosecutor examining a witness and a forceful defense attorney.

Mitchell, the veteran Arizona sex crimes prosecutor brought in to pinch-hit for the Republican men on the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday, has been a polite and engaging force, as she's probed Ford's memory. Christine Blasey Ford said she is “100 percent” certain Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her in a bedroom at a social gathering in suburban Washington, D.C., in the 1980s when both were still in high school. Kavanaugh has denied the allegations.

“Do you recall prior to getting there … had you had anything to drink?” Mitchell asked Ford.

“Were you on any sort of medication?”

“What was the atmosphere like at the gathering?”

“At some point, do you recall [the music] being turned down?” she asked.

Yet her questioning—delivered in five-minute intervals—have turned from establishing a baseline of facts about the incident, toward questions of Ford's fear of flying and her travels domestically and internationally, her polygraph process, and the lead up to Thursday's testimony.

Committee member Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, likened Mitchell's questions to a cross-examination at a criminal trial meant to undermine Ford's memory of the attack and credibility. Hirono noted that Mitchell was not asking questions about the alleged assault.

As Ford has fielded questions from Mitchell and the committee's Democrats, she's been flanked by two of her attorneys: D.C. attorney Debra Katz and veteran prosecutor Michael Bromwich, who have alternately counseled their client and other times poured her coffee.

Lisa Banks, another Ford attorney from Katz, Marshall & Banks, sat behind Ford.

After a lunch break, Mitchell probed Ford on the matter of a polygraph test, submitted to the Senate committee prior to Thursday's hearing.

“I believe you said it hasn't been paid for yet, is that correct?” Mitchell asked.

“Let me put an end to this misery. Her lawyers have paid for her polygraph,” Katz said, butting in.

“As is routine,” Bromwich said in a follow-up.

In a separate exchange, as Mitchell pressed Ford on whether anyone helped pay for her legal fees, Bromwich butted in: “I think I can help you with that. Both co-counsel are doing this pro-bono. We are not being paid, and we have no expectation of being paid,” Bromwich replied.

Mitchell's approach and performance has divided lawyers on social media.

“Prosecutor Rachel Mitchell is conducting a pretty standard intake interview with a victim,” former federal prosecutor Joyce Alene wrote on Twitter, adding the observation that the arrangement of five minutes for questioning was a “ridiculous process.”

“I'd hoped Rachel Mitchell would act like a prosecutor, but she is 100% acting as the Republicans' defense attorney,” Allison Leotta, an author and former sex crimes prosecutor in Washington, D.C., tweeted.

“[A]re there any other efforts besides your own personal finances to pay for your legal fees, or any of the other costs incurred?”

“I think I can help you with that. Both co-counsel are doing this pro-bono. We are not being paid, and we have no expectation of being paid,” Bromwich replied.

Read more:

'Uproarious Laughter' Haunts Ford From Alleged Kavanaugh Attack

Federal Judge Who Dated Kavanaugh Defends Character, Dismisses Anonymous Tip

Read Christine Blasey Ford's Prepared Statement for Kavanaugh Hearing

All Sides Dig In as Politics Heat Up Ahead of Kavanaugh Hearing