A Court failing to convict someone of a crime has never meant that the person has done no wrong. The burden of proof is extremely high, as it probably should be given that you're going to send someone to prison. There's a fundamental assumption in the judicial system - one I think most people would agree with - that it's better to let a guilty person go free than to falsely punish an innocent one. There are consequences of that, and the ease of escaping sexual assault charges is one of them, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the entire system is fundamentally flawed.
The important thing to keep in mind is that courts operate at very high standards of proof, and they shouldn't be seen as an ultimately arbiter of whether or not someone is a good person - only whether there's enough evidence for the state to imprison them, which is a very different question.
Ab_intra@lemmy.world 1 year ago
In principle I trust in the judicial system… But when you are talking about a multimillionaire that can throw his whole fortune on this then I get sceptical.
By all means he might be innocent. But when there is so many people accusing him… I don’t see why they would put themselves trough all this media outcry just for a payday. By all means it’s a possibility… But just look at the Harvey Weinstein case…
I’m not sure by all means that he’s guilty. For all we know he has done nothing of what has been claimed… But when there is so many people coming out with their stories it’s hard not to think there is more to it.