It would be better all round if they (the media) didn't conflate various bad behaviour with the alleged crimes for quite a few reasons but mostly it plays into the "out to take him down" defence and makes the serious alleged crimes look less important.

There should also be more context to all of the incidents. If some of these women were in some kind of relationship with him while he was smashing the rocks and brown it's possible, but I would say very unlikely, that they weren't getting high while with him. As noted in another thread on here, that doesn't stop rape being rape but it complicates things as far as how accurate the recollections are and also gives a very different picture about the circumstances. It's like that Bill Burr bit about how the #MeToo stories kind of tailed off from actual crimes into just bad dates: "He was twenty minutes late...the chicken was overcooked..."

SueC's post about bad experiences and guilt arising from them seems very pertinent to me and is something that you don't see mentioned in the coverage of this in the media. It's just "Woman says this happened 20 years ago, man guilty, burn him".

It seems the initial frenzy has died down so now I guess we have to wait and see whether any actual legal action occurs but he's already been tarred and feathered whatever the final outcome.

I'm not much of a fan of his, particularly his more recent incarnation, but this trial by anonymous accusation in the media is exactly the kind of thing "they" have constantly been claiming doesn't exist and leaves a bad taste in the mouth....err...so to speak.