You didn't mention legal consequences in your original post, that's obviously a different order of action with explicit criterion than whether or not this deserves third-party investigation which may lead to legal action. She also cites specific instances without naming names, I don't know why you're talking about someone "feeling" something is racially motivated. At bottom, you're also kinda missing my ethics point around how minority claims are recognized prima facie.
> that's obviously a different order of action with explicit criterion than whether or not this deserves third-party investigation which may lead to legal action.
To my saying "plausible doesn't mean actionable," you jumped to the following conclusion:
> So no racism claims are valid without either AV recording or, in all statistical likelihood, a non-Black person vouching for her?
I thought it was necessary to find some foundation on which we both agreed before addressing your conclusion. If we didn't at least agree that the concrete example wasn't legally actionable, then our viewpoints would be too disconnected to make the effort worth it.
How about this: if there is a "he said she said" situation where the accuser believes the accused did something racially motivated, and neither the accused nor the accuser have any evidence other than their word, should the accused face a real consequence?