It makes the point that was intended, which was this 'is' happening, and that without a preponderance of evidence its a he said she said with no action being ta

It makes the point that was intended, which was this 'is' happening, and that without a preponderance of evidence its a he said she said with no action being taken (even if it did happen). As for Epstein being a better link, no that is not the case for a lot of sound reasons I won't be getting into here. > Your link is a demonstration of if you do collect evidence the police will prosecute. No it is not. Its a demonstration that these things happen from a reputable source that has been documented. The implication you make is quite different, and its unsupportable because its based in fallacy. Having data that something has happened doesn't mean the police will prosecute, or that any action will be taken to correct. The two are independent.