> When you are self-righteous prick as prickly as brand, it is extremely easy to believe the accusers.

This is why courts use the only system that has a chance of finding the truth.

Yes but the courts are legally empowered to lock someone in a cage for years. So they should be working by a different standard than a company firing someone.

Firing someone for a horrific accusation might not be that different to locking the person in a cage.

I don’t know many people that would prefer the later, since being locked in a cage also comes with losing your job, a horrible accusation proven true (or admitted to) in court and a public criminal record.

Losing your income and being publicly shamed sucks, but you still can rely on close friends and family, a public safety net and lawsuits (if you’ve been defamed or illegally fired), while enjoying sunshine, fresh air and freedom of movement.

Well - true, but there are plenty of stories of people being abandoned by friends and family on the strength of an accusation.

Yes, false accusations are indeed a bad thing. But the point is that people choosing to no longer associate with you is very different to people forcing you to live in a cage under the threat of violence.

Both are unpleasant. One is worse. Thus the burden of proof is different.

The only system? Which courts? Not all courts use the same system. The UK court system is different than the US system. Criminal court is different than civil.

You think courts find the truth?

I think what I said : - ) Which is not that.

>Sentient buildings weird me out.

Courts are not buildings, sentient or otherwise. A court can exist without even a single brick or piece of stone being around.

You're also making this about Brand when in fact this is a discussion at a higher level of abstraction.