Weinstein is most likely a creep who used his power to abuse women. I don't know the exact nature of the allegations against him, and what evidence was presented. However, in general, the standard of evidence in these kinds of trials strikes me as unfair…
Weinstein is most likely a creep who used his power to abuse women. I don't know the exact nature of the allegations against him, and what evidence was presented. However, in general, the standard of evidence in these kinds of trials strikes me as unfair…
I do not feel that the testimony of the person making the accusation should be considered authoritative evidence in itself. Especially when the accusation is made years after the fact, and cannot be objectively corroborating in any meaningful sense.
I don't see how there can be any trial regarding matters that are simply one party's word against the other. I feel such accusations should be dismissed with prejudice and never reach a jury.
Asking a jury to evaluate claims simply on the basis of how convincingly and sympathetically someone testifies strikes me as inherently prone to bias. Justice should be based on objectivity and logic, not drawing conclusions based on emotion and stereotypes.
@PhilippusArabus Without judgment on the basis of feelings and not facts, it would be impossible for women to prevail in divorce settlement, custody, sexual harassment, or rape cases.