Just want to throw this out there while thinking about it, regarding the Kavanaugh hearings:
Some people have been identified as "Witness" by the accuser. Being said, does that not mean the recollections about what transpired by that witness are to believed? My thoughts are yes, they should be held in support of truth as offered by the accuser. Therefore, regardless of what she says, or he says (he said - she said dichotomy) doesn't the witness testimony hold higher credibility? Just a thought.