Yes, she is very clearly guilty. I meant her victim, the teen she sent to prison on a false child molestation conviction. The only evidence against him was her testimony that he had molested her several years ago. That was it. There was no other evidence offered beyond that.
That fails the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard, but the judge convicted the young man regardless, which is not how “the system” is supposed to work.
Did he have to agree to a judge trial with no jury.