[Pfhreak]

> But until anything is proven in court, it doesn't mean anything.

I don't know that court is the bar for 'meaning something'. For example, if a victim has evidence but for various reasons cannot succeed in a court case (statute of limitations, for example) are you really saying their allegations don't mean anything?

[paulddraper]

Yes, but you often don't have all the facts until it goes to court.

Person A reveals plain-as-day romantically suggestive emails, blows the lid off the story, gets media attention.

Only until sometime later does Person B provide the emails proving it was a two way thing.

[paulryanrogers]

This reminds me of the OJ Simpson murder trials, one criminal and one civil. But two different outcomes.

Harvey Weinstein is facing both a judicial and public trial of sorts. Yet in that case there appear to be more public accusers, and some with nothing to gain and much to lose. (Which I think makes their statements more convincing, if more difficult to produce an independent jury for any judicial trial.)

EDIT: typo