zenthusiast
cybersabre his prophet
- Oct 20, 2009
- 19,191
- 6,727
At the time, I was commenting on the relative meaninglessness of having anonymous sources, so the plausibility of the accusation/defense are really all we’ll ever have to reach a conclusion from. I’ll never say “he did it” or “he didn’t do it” unless the accuser recants or he admits, but “he probably did it” or “he probably didn’t” could both be reasonable conclusions given things one might know about the circumstancesOf course you aren’t bound by legal burdens of proof. But what you’re suggesting is accepting an allegation as true without waiting for any facts or evidence to come out, right? Which, why? I don’t get why people do that. That type of thinking will fail you quite a bit.
I may have totally misunderstood, but that’s the vibe I got from your posts. My point is none of us have any idea of what happened, and no facts or evidence has come out yet (if ever)
We also don’t really have any stakes for reaching these conclusions whereas any fact finder on the case must be *very* sure they’ve done so for the best reasons