Connor

--- if that was their screenshot and there was no date stamp. So until she shows something that proves BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that what she said happened actually happened, she's sus.

--- archives and showing us that it was THERE. Twitter keeps your DMs even if you deleted them. The claim that you can delete dms in archives is false because it's on read-only. But she only keeps pointing fingers saying she posted all evidence. She doesn't even have proof ---

--- the screenshots on a browser. ???? Why?? 3) They're a newly flipped account... that supposedly had zero interactions and no one can access their DMs if you're not mutuals. 4) She could have had posted several proofs that the dms were indeed there by accessing their own ---

|| And until evidence is shown that proves this counter evidence wrong, I'm not believing shit. There were a lot of sus things in their ss too. 1) Why's the first, cropped paragraph blank? You'd think if you're exposing someone, you'll show everything they sent. 2) They posted-

|| Other than that? It's called being an adult.

|| I know some of you believe the victim and never look at the accused, especially if it's a woman accusing. But man, when an evidence against accusations is presented, actually read because this ain't the first time someone lied about their accusations against someone