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.
That’s not how evidence works but I appreciate the thought
It is tho, whiteness testimony is admissable evidence in a court of law.
Yes but they’re WOMEN so their words don’t count and/or they’re lying /whores/gold diggers
Hm, while a witness’s testimony may be evidence, iiuc, it would only be one piece of evidence. I think what’s important is whether the evidence in question can be considered sufficient.