1/2
Actually, Elaine, you did answer my question on exactly my terms! Indeed you interpreted my terms more harshly than intended. I was NOT proposing a choice between innocent and guilt, but between preponderance of the evidence AVAILABLE IN THIS STORY--was the candidate deacon's story "more likely" true or "more likely" false.

On the other hand, you did stray beyond the evidence available to both of us. I presume you understand that it is a flagrant violation of due process to invoke something like "inundation of false accusations these days." Even if that were true, to invoke data extraneous to the evidence about this case. is a the very essence of discrimination. There is no difference, in terms of due process, between (1) condemned a black man of raping a white women because that is what they do, and (2) your invoking your conviction that false accusations are rife these days to acquit the bishop here.

How about we try discussing this on the bases of available evidence alone?