What if the accuser gives credible testimony and the accused prevaricates and obfuscates?
I mean, unfortunately, that’s how sexual assault cases often have to be litigated, because it’s not unusual for the accuser and the accused to be the only witnesses. So unless you’re comfortable basically never prosecuting any sexual assault cases, you’re left with considering testimony as evidence, and weighing the credibility of the parties. Even if you had doubts that BK did it, it seems like he pretty transparently lied to avoid the conclusion that he might have done it and not remembered it, or even considered it NBD. I’m still surprised and disappointed that this has not been sufficiently acknowledged.
It’s all academic at this point—and that’s leaving aside that we are talking about a confirmation hearing, not a criminal trial. But for whatever it’s worth, politics aside, it was hard for me to escape the conclusion that on that day, one party was lying and the other party was truthful.