Beverly McLaughlin has served Canada very well. Thanks Beverly!

Our rule of law is based on the idea that in order to be convicted one must offer evidence that would lead a juror or judge to believe "beyond a reasonable doubt" that the accused perpetrated the law in a particular way.

No lawyer or judge in their right mind suggests that victims should not be believed. The issue is that our way of doing law is based on centuries of experience where "witch hunts" have wound up seeing the accused guilty (and often executed) even as we determine, especially in the last 20-30 years, that many who have been determined guilty were actually innocent when DNA and forensic evidence was brought forward.

Believing an accuser's testimony and a verdict are not the same thing. In our culture of Twitter narratives we think that they are. Consider OJ Simpson. I suspect we all believe that he did it, but there was insufficient evidence in the courtroom to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.