If you are paying attention, you will notice that defenders of the idea of "innocent until proven guilty" are getting trashed JUST as bad as those who claim to know something about Bob's alleged guilt.


Here's the thing: if Bob had lived, all of the supposed evidence against would have been put to the test.   Witnesses to the alleged act would have had to get up on the stand and tell their story.   I am quite sure that this would have been very difficult for them, but presumably they were ready to go through that in the interest of seeing justice done.

But now Brozman is gone, and it looks to me like the venue has been moved to the court of public opinion.      However, the accusers want the best of both worlds: they want the world to believe them without ever going through the difficulty of telling their story.    Sorry, it doesn't work that way.   If you want to make the charge stick, you gotta tell your story and undergo the cross-examination.   Do you think Bob's lawyer would have pulled any punches if this had gone to a court of law?


oh, now I see that due to supposed "dissension among the families" I guess the story is never going to come out.    All I can say is..."how convenient."