Quote Originally Posted by Rogatum View Post
Generally speaking my issue is how people are in agreement that a person should seek professional help, yet it is okay for the victim to go to the court of public opinion to place the accused in a position where they have to prove their innocence rather then guilt. .
Maybe to warn other people so that nobody else will get hurt by this person anymore? If he is so innocent why not prove it? The online magazine talked to him too and yet he did not feel the need to prove his innocence eventhough he said that he could. Why? If I am truly innocent and somehow over a dozen of other people tell lies about me, I would do my best to prove them as guilty. Yet somehow he posted a screenshot later that blacked out the sentences that the other woman posted and again later he posted "evidence" on some kind of blog (which kinda makes it look like he wrote that post himself) that only showed something while the person was still under his influence. (I mean I am not saying that every victim always behaved like an angel) Also he went against their wishes to remain hidden and called some of them with their names. Did some victims behave badly too? Yes probably, but for someone that sees himself as innocent he surely does not behave that way. Also why should people even believe his screenshots, if they can be changed that much too? Who is to say that any of his sources are not just written by him? Isnt it just strange that he took down his social media, gave the magazine away and said that he would step down, dont post any evidence when it was still fresh...and days later suddenly there is "evidence" that are either blacked out screenshots or computer written messages and he took the magazine back and deleted a few tweets about this..

I am not going to post about your other points because I gave enough examples why its better that victims in such cases have professional help.