He was found not guilty to all charges in a court of law. The women accusing him failed to provide evidence that could convict him. What more do you want?

---

@**tippy*toes** wrote:

He was found not guilty to all charges in a court of law. The women accusing him failed to provide evidence that could convict him. What more do you want?

---

Yes, found not guilty in a court of law, that doesn't mean he is innocent.

I get that. And Robert Hughes isn't necessarily guilty because a court of law convicts him, either. Based on what, the words of girls thirty years later? Pfffft...

Happy family. 

---

@**tippy*toes** wrote:

I get that. And Robert Hughes isn't necessarily guilty because a court of law convicts him, either. Based on what, the words of girls thirty years later? Pfffft...

---

Actually he IS found guilty by a court of law. Duh. 

Courts only have to show Guilty or Not Guilty. Not Guilty means that there was not sufficient evidence to determine that he/she did commit the crime and doesn't mean they're innocent. Robert Hughes was found Guilty. 

Lol, Bobeh, you missed my point as usual. There is just as much evidence Robert Hughes is guilty as there is that Craig Mclachlan is - meaning zilch. Just the words of a bunch of girls. In both cases you and nobody else can prove what, if anything, happened. Get it?