If you're a reasonably intelligent person subject to real wrongdoing of this nature, would it not behoove you to collect evidence that will support your allegations of misconduct when you finally make your claim public? The fact that there really is not one piece of evidence she's been able to produce leads me to believe that claims of sexual misconduct are anything more than imagined.

I've been in a situation where I was reasonably certain that I observed fiduciary misconduct. At the time I basically had three choices:

(1) stay at the company and ignore it (2) stay at the company and collect irrefutable evidence and expose the wrongdoing; or (3) ignore it and leave the company because it was not my problem to deal with and would be more damaging to my career to do something about it.

There was never a 4th option: "expose the wrongdoing with no concrete evidence". I didn't have enough to substantiate any allegations. It's entirely possible that I could have even been mistaken about what actually happened since my relationship with the person in question was rocky and I might have been projecting my negative perceptions of that person onto a novel situation. Without collecting concrete evidence to prove my allegations, I couldn't even be certain of what happened, much less certain that exposing the wrongdoing without evidence would be fruitful.

The burden of proof was the responsibility of the accuser, and in this instance the accuser has failed to substantiate claims made.