Even if we take into consideration that 90% (out of 25) could be lying (they aren’t), that’s still ~3 women he assaulted.
Edit: Damn y’all, thanks for that old internet feeling I keep coming back to Lemmy for. Not a girl in sight in these comments.
Is testifying under oath not considered evidence? There have been so many credible lawsuits against this guy for sexual assault. Honestly what are these files going to prove that we don’t already have plenty of evidence for?
And lastly, do you have any idea what going after a rich powerful man for sexually assaulting you does to your life? Why the fuck would anybody put themselves through that if they weren’t absolutely sure they had a credible case? Some of the plaintiffs in these cases had their lives and their family’s lives threatened and disrupted.
Welp, to the bottom with me I suppose.
This can still ruin someone’s life though. As soon as there are whispers of an accusation that are official it’s over. There needs to be a better way.
What way is better than investigating allegations impartially? Do you know of something better that wouldn’t require someone to be psychic, or require everyone coming to some nigh impossible position where no one lies?
I agree with your first sentence but then you went off on a mocking-tangent instead of promoting an actual conversation that’s important. We see investigations used both politically and socially (perp-walks are one way law enforcement berates during an investigation, also giving press releases/public announcements before all the facts are collected). There are ways which police act respectfully during an investigation when it’s someone they like, a more neutral way for EVERYONE can be achieved.