AJ:
No strawman. Courts require a burden of proof. True. But at the end of the proceedings, all the old cases will result in the accuser saying he did it and the alleged perpetrator saying he did not do it. In the legal sense, there has not been evidence or other proof, and the case should end in acquittal (I know this is in civil, not criminal court, and I am only borrowing the term). But in the climate of today, the alleged victim is always believed (the @MeToo baloney), and the juries will make awards. That is problematic. The accusation is accepted as if it is evidence, and the denial is dismissed as lying. In the absence of the insane awards of money, there will be the opportunity to destroy someone’s reputation. That is dinei nefashos. That should be done with actual proof, not the MeToo attitude.