When you advocate for a person who is at the very least a proven double rapist (with countless other allegations that haven't yet been seen by a court of law),

When you advocate for a person who is at the very least a proven double rapist (with countless other allegations that haven't yet been seen by a court of law), describing them as a good person that they treat people with "decency, equality, and generosity", it justifiably raises serious questions about the sincerity of your abuse advocacy and who you presented yourself as. It was a calculated decision and it is reasonable to think he had enough information from lawyers and friends to know how it would be received and how it looks. In spite of this, he still decided to bat for his convicted double rapist friend who, beyond just his crimes, has his connections in Scientology ruin the lives of many women brave enough to speak up against him. It's not just the single act, it's that it was an act that he had a lot of time to think through and fully understand. It was an act which the years of his advocacy should have given him an understanding of the damage these types of men do to women and girls when they're free. That's what makes it so egregious for me. Advocating for a convicted double rapist isn't a crime of passion, a poor choice of words, or a drunken fight.