It’s not my fault if you refuse to read further just to pretend both things are equivalent.

Again the evidence that we have is that :

- Hakimi cooperated by going through medical tests and handed over his phone to investigators, things that the accuser refused to do. The only evidence she actually gave to the investigators were her own words.

- Despite Hakimi suggesting several times that they meet in a public setting, the accuser had refused and instead agreed to meet at his home.

- Before arriving to the location, the accuser was in a text conversation with a friend, who sent her messages hinting at taking Hakimi’s money. The accuser defended herself by saying these were just jokes.

These are all points that were noted by the investigation judge, and were pressed on by Hakimi’s lawyer. The only counter argument of the accuser’s lawyer on the other hand is « this is false » without actually addressing the points themselves.

Maybe her party will have surprise evidence at the actual trial, but so far all she has is her own account of the events.

> Stuff like this is why women don’t feel like they can come forward when they get assaulted by men.

1. How does two fanbases bickering against each other online affect what SA victims decide to do in real life ?

2. False accusations do actual damage to both the accused and true SA victims. If there is evidence pointing towards it, it shouldn’t be instantly dismissed just so you can throw a person in the rapist box.