She’s testified as to what she claims Trump did. Several friends have attested as to what she told them after. They’ve had an expert witness testify that her actions in the wake of the alleged attack were in keeping with how women often respond to such an assault. Another woman has testified that he groped her aboard an airplane and that he later recognized her as a “c**t” he encountered aboard an airplane. Testimony is evidence, however credible it may or may not be. You can call it “he said, she said”, except that he’s not saying anything here.
“her actions in the wake of the alleged attack were in keeping with how women often respond to such an assault. “
BY WHOM? Even IF (BIG IF) she had been raped, WHO raped her?
She says Trump. Okay PROVE IT! Oh, you CAN’T....
You’ve said a couple times here that both sides present evidence and whoever has more evidence wins - but the law is not nearly that symmetrical when it comes to presentation of evidence.
The burden of proof rests squarely on the prosecution to present sufficient evidence of guilt. Therefore, it is quite common for a defense team to present no direct evidence at all - but rather to focus on debunking the evidence presented by the prosecution.
While it’s true that a defense team may sometimes present evidence in order to refute the prosecution’s evidence, that is not necessarily so. In many cases, the prosecution presents evidence and the defense seeks to discredit it.
For example, if the accuser has an eye witness claiming they were there on a certain day and saw the whole thing, the defense may present counter evidence proving that the defendant was elsewhere on that day.
My understanding of this case is that the accuser’s evidence is so vague and circumstantial that counter evidence is not possible - or necessary. If the accuser can’t even remember what day or week the incident occurred, how can Trump possibly prove he was elsewhere at the time? And why should he have to?