[spetznaz]

I'm not a lawyer, but I believe the burden of proof for a criminal case (like this one) is beyond all reasonable doubt, while the burden of proof for a civil case is be (far) simpler preponderance of evidence.

This case MAY not meet the requirements for a criminal case, but were it a civil case it would have been open and shut.

[odawg]

“This case MAY not meet the requirements for a criminal case”

You mean the sworn testimony of about forty women means nothing? As Jay Leno says, even the Muslims only require four.