Quote:Which is why I used the term circumstantial evidence. I cannot look past the mountain of it to make myself believe at the very least one of these incidents is not true. Is there a chance every single one of these women is making it up? Considering almost all of them have nothing to gain from it, I would say that is unlikely. If he remotely hid the fact he is an overt misogynist, it might be harder to believe. He is wholly unapologetic about every facet in his life. His own words and actions paint the picture of a man more than capable of such behavior. His ex accused him of marital rape. It is not a stretch to believe him capable of all of this and more. While none of this is smoking gun evidence, common sense would dictate it is more than probable at the very least one of the dozen women accusing him of inappropriate touching is telling the truth. I can objectively look at the details and the accused and draw a conclusion that requires no mental gymnastics.

Did you read through what you just wrote Kotite? Do you not see the fatal flaw in using accusations as circumstantial evidence that those same accusations are true? Come on man.


All of this is just you proving your own bias to yourself. None of this is evidence of guilt , its all opinion and completely subjective.


"common sense would dictate it is more than probable at the very least one of the dozen women accusing him of inappropriate touching is telling the truth."


No. This is not how this works. Common sense does not dictate that you decide guilt or innocence with zero concrete evidence to back up claims.

---