I get that, but I tend to think the burden of proof in a criminal case is much higher than the burden of proof to believe a victim outside of a courtroom.
In this case I don’t think there is any reason to doubt the victims, and the pressure and evidence points to victims tending to not come forward, the fact that there are multiple accusations from multiple victims indicates to me a much higher probability that Gaiman is guilty of some sexual crimes than not. Luckily my opinion or assessment of Gaiman’s behavior doesn’t have consequences like jail time, so my beliefs do not demand the same scrutiny as a judge’s or a jury’s.
Not that it’s wrong to think about the evidence, but culturally I think we tend to discount survivors and victims more than we validate them, and that can make questions about evidence really difficult, even harmful. Still, we obviously can’t ignore the problem of evidence, but luckily that’s primarily a concern for the courts (not that being cancelled doesn’t have consequences, and “cancel culture” can be reactive, essentializing, and unfair - that’s probably something we should collectively think about more).
A fair breakdown, and logically thought out opinion. Rare these days. Looking at the evidence you provided makes me lean heavily in the same direction as yourself. The reactivity of online “cancel culture” is what had me second guessing, especially since the authorities dropped it. Thanks for taking the time to help me better understand the situation and get the full picture.
I get that, but I tend to think the burden of proof in a criminal case is much higher than the burden of proof to believe a victim outside of a courtroom.
In this case I don’t think there is any reason to doubt the victims, and the pressure and evidence points to victims tending to not come forward, the fact that there are multiple accusations from multiple victims indicates to me a much higher probability that Gaiman is guilty of some sexual crimes than not. Luckily my opinion or assessment of Gaiman’s behavior doesn’t have consequences like jail time, so my beliefs do not demand the same scrutiny as a judge’s or a jury’s.
Not that it’s wrong to think about the evidence, but culturally I think we tend to discount survivors and victims more than we validate them, and that can make questions about evidence really difficult, even harmful. Still, we obviously can’t ignore the problem of evidence, but luckily that’s primarily a concern for the courts (not that being cancelled doesn’t have consequences, and “cancel culture” can be reactive, essentializing, and unfair - that’s probably something we should collectively think about more).
A fair breakdown, and logically thought out opinion. Rare these days. Looking at the evidence you provided makes me lean heavily in the same direction as yourself. The reactivity of online “cancel culture” is what had me second guessing, especially since the authorities dropped it. Thanks for taking the time to help me better understand the situation and get the full picture.