Anyone who thinks an adult telling about being molested as a child is a liar --

[Jim Lane]

183. I don't know what you should do with me.

With regard to the specific case at hand, I have no opinion. I haven't read Dylan Farrow's statement, or the Vanity Fair article that (I gather) lays out the defense side. In the replies to you there are links to other sources about the case, and I haven't clicked through to read any of them. There are detailed replies here, from both sides, and I've only skimmed them. I don't feel called upon to form a well-founded opinion on every particular case that makes the news. As a result, I have no sound basis for assessing Dylan Farrow's credibility.

In general, I believe that, when an adult makes a statement about having been abused as a child, some of those statements are true and some are false. When an accused denies having committed abuse, some of those denials are true and some are false.

The replies have expanded the discussion into the area of rape where no children were involved, so I'll add: Some people alleging they were raped are lying, and some are telling the truth. Some are telling the truth about having been raped, and of those, some have correctly identified the perpetrator, and some have mistakenly identified someone else. Some people who deny having committed rape are lying, and some are telling the truth.

In each of these cases, my statement that there are at least some people in each category does not imply that the numbers are equal. I don't know what percentage of such accusations and denials are true.

As to how the criminal justice system proceeds, I believe that most prosecutors act in good faith, but they're only human. Sometimes they bring cases that, in light of the evidence they have, shouldn't be brought. Sometimes the evidence justifies bringing the case but the defendant is nevertheless innocent. Sometimes prosecutors don't bring cases where the evidence is sufficient -- some of those times being for a good reason, such as the effect on the victim of being forced to testify, and some being for a bad reason, such as the prospective defendant's political influence. As a result of all this, the bringing of a case is not proof of guilt, and the failure to prosecute is not proof of innocence.

I guess you should ignore some of my posts, which is probably sound advice anyway.