https://nypost.com/2019/11/26/sarah-ferguson-wants-prince-andrew-accuser-to-be-put-on-the-rack-during-bbc-interview/

It is progress to suggest that lurid accusers (with mercenary motives, as Giuffre Roberts) be queried, though that should be done in a courtroom, not just in media. And, of course, the media have been remiss in hyping rather than querying.

"Drive-by" accusations, such as those made by Giuffre Roberts against Andrew and Dershowitz, are the equivalent of a lynching. Feminism has turned human rights back centuries.

Accusations of criminality belong in a courtroom, where they can be subject to fair and impartial evaluation, with rules of evidence and cross-examination.

Instead, the affinity of false accusers for media lynchings allows them to circumvent discovery of their actions, proof, evidentiary rules, cross-examination, etc.

Justice for the accused is further handicapped by:

  • Inability of defamation responses to give him justice, as a defamation suit only keeps his name in the public eye longer and besmirches it further.
  • Society's approval for women making unsubstantiated claims reduces evaluation to a guess dependent upon how he "looks" when denying. Judging the criminal guilt or innocence of a Kavanaugh or Andrew upon their "performance" when denying is absurd and unreliable: https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/9jlab3/why_all_oathonoath_proceedings_fordkavanaugh_are/

Logical questions posed by another redditor here, four years ago, remain mostly unanswered:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/2rgrxg/virgina_roberts_teenage_sex_slave_or_underage/