How Credible are Cain’s Accusers?

I’m honestly not sure.

The first rule is to look for independent confirmation of alleged facts. In this case, that doesn’t appear to be feasible.

Since we can’t independently confirm the alleged facts let’s fall back on logic and common sense.

Four women have accused Cain of sexual misconduct and two women, Sharon Bialek and Karen Kraushaar, have gone public with their accusations. But only Bialek has provided any details.

It’s those details I’ve finding hard to accept. She’s not describing harassment but outright assault. Bialek’s claims moves things from the civil arena into the criminal arena and I can’t believe Cain would act that stupidly. We’re not even talking about someone that Cain had a long association with but someone that was practically a stranger. It makes absolutely no sense. That plus the fact that Bialek never filed any charges leads me to doubt her story.

Kraushaar is a little different. She did file a complaint and received what sounds like a “here’s some money now go away” payment of $45,000 from the National Restaurant Association. What concerns me about Kraushaar is she filed a complaint about “unfair treatment” in her next job. Either this lady has really lousy luck or she’s hyper sensitive. She also hasn’t provided any details so I think I’ll wait before coming to a conclusion.

As for the two unidentified accusers, the 6th Amendment to the Constitution says the accused has the right “to be confronted with the witnesses against him.” I support the Constitution so until that happens, I’m going to have to pretty much ignore them. I have nothing to base their veracity on.

Basically Cain is being asked to prove a negative, to prove something didn’t happen without even being provided with an adequate definition of what that something was. Whatever happened to “innocent until proven guilty?”

I’m going to reserve judgment for the moment but Occam's Razor is sort of pointing toward Cain being something of an insensitive boor on occasion.