The presumption of innocence has to be social and cultural, not just legal, for it to have any meaning at all. And I suggest that if it’s not social and cultural, it’s unlikely to be legal for long. The idea that we should abandon it out of hand because some people do bad things is mob mentality. It’s not like mobs are always wrong about their targets. It’s their decision processes that define them.
The evidence you found is not compelling. The evidence I found is not compelling. The ASU statement is not evidence. It’s hearsay. (It’s hearsay even if it’s all true.) No one has even bothered to address the fact that ASU is a party to the accusations and also has potential liabilities to manage.
If I’m missing something from your point of view it’s not because I haven’t seen what you’ve shown me. It’s because you’re “reading between the lines” which, while often useful in deciding whether to let someone in our home or business, is wholly inappropriate when deciding whether to vilify someone. “I don’t want to leave this guy alone with my daughter” is much different than “We shouldn’t listen to this guy about anything.”
And, again, the issue here is @iron0013’s original post, in which he not only doesn’t cite any of the things you and I cited, but goes a step farther and tries to use the fact of Krauss’ resignation as evidence of his motivations without even bothering to make an argument. Then people piled on the idea that we shouldn’t listen to Krauss at all. I’m willing to stipulate that you don’t have a mob mentality. Although we disagree, I think you’re reasonable. But surely you can see that it exists.
The presumption of innocence is an irrational bias that we introduce in criminal cases in order to favor false negatives over false positives. If you think that we should all be applying the presumption of innocence to each other all the time, then you've fundamentally misunderstood the nature of the principle that you think you're defending.
I think the original post didn't provide citations because Krauss's inappropriate behavior is well known and easy to verify from the sources in the Wikipedia article.
This discussion would be a lot easier if you'd just make your defense of Krauss, instead of accusing everyone else of being part of a mob. Krauss is not the victim. The victims are the women he harassed and the sex slaves of the pimp who bankrolled him, and who he publicly defended. Extraordinarily, you still talk vaguely as if there is some realistic doubt about any of this.
There is not such a lack of public voices that we must give every single one, even though of absolutely awful people, an equal hearing.
There are many, many people who would be more informative to listen on this topic. They could have been given the space to write an opinion article in this prestigious newspaper. It didn't have to be the sex pest. We missed out on hearing a good person speak on the subject, because a bad one was given the opportunity instead.
The evidence you found is not compelling. The evidence I found is not compelling. The ASU statement is not evidence. It’s hearsay. (It’s hearsay even if it’s all true.) No one has even bothered to address the fact that ASU is a party to the accusations and also has potential liabilities to manage.
If I’m missing something from your point of view it’s not because I haven’t seen what you’ve shown me. It’s because you’re “reading between the lines” which, while often useful in deciding whether to let someone in our home or business, is wholly inappropriate when deciding whether to vilify someone. “I don’t want to leave this guy alone with my daughter” is much different than “We shouldn’t listen to this guy about anything.”
And, again, the issue here is @iron0013’s original post, in which he not only doesn’t cite any of the things you and I cited, but goes a step farther and tries to use the fact of Krauss’ resignation as evidence of his motivations without even bothering to make an argument. Then people piled on the idea that we shouldn’t listen to Krauss at all. I’m willing to stipulate that you don’t have a mob mentality. Although we disagree, I think you’re reasonable. But surely you can see that it exists.