posted by wkfanSo, the pragmatist in me continues to ask how you can believe her story without any physical evidence or corroboration of any sort? Yes, she was compelling on the stand and in her testimony.....but at the end of the day, it is her word against his.
Generally, in cases where it is a 'he said, she said', I generally believe that the truth is somewhere in the middle.
I do think the truth is somewhere in the middle. I do think it is possible to believe her account and to believe he honestly does not remember it. It's possible he may have either forgotten the event or was too drunk to remember it.
She came off as very believable to me.
Also, I'm not sold that others deny it took place. Only Mark Judge knows and he said, like Kav, he does not remember it. That's not a denial exactly. He could have been black out drunk too, who knows.
Again, yesterday was sad because everyone heard what they wanted to hear through their own partisan lens.