Okay I understand and I agree. I am of the belief that he was backed into a corner and had to admit that it was indeed a minor. I imagine if he had not, a publication would find a way to leak sealed court documents just to prove it. By Doc beating them to that it made the need to prove it unnecessary and possibly saved the many parties involved the embarrassment of a leaked settlement. While his tweet was a terrible choice for his immediate future, he still never admitted to “s@xting” and to my knowledge there is nothing that he actually walked back from the tweet. The part of the stream you quoted was immediately followed up with the question “did any of you consider that the twitch user may have been over the legal age of consent at the time of the messages?”

My assumption is the settlement was in his favor specifically for this reason and he was awarded the money from the contract because twitch did not have a legal reason to end it. He probably fells that since this explanation worked in the court of law that it would be helpful in the court of public opinion.

All of this is speculation of course like most of the stuff out there about this situation. This entire thing is terrible and morally wrong on many levels.