If she knew she scanned the items, there was no THC in the vapes, and the pills weren’t hers, why did she resign? And then why didn’t the university take her back after the truth was revealed? And why wouldn’t they have forcefully defended her by showing the evidence that she committed no crime? We better find a way to push back against the power of the Internet to create these conditions.
your employer isn’t interested in truth and justice, they are interested in avoiding bad PR.
the same reason that anyone who gets a false charges basically has their life ruined, nobody wants to associate with the association of crime, even if you are proven innocent, the fact you were charged at all makes you guilty in the court of public opinion. and pushing back, just makes you look more guilty.
If she knew she scanned the items, there was no THC in the vapes, and the pills weren’t hers, why did she resign? And then why didn’t the university take her back after the truth was revealed? And why wouldn’t they have forcefully defended her by showing the evidence that she committed no crime? We better find a way to push back against the power of the Internet to create these conditions.
because PR.
your employer isn’t interested in truth and justice, they are interested in avoiding bad PR.
the same reason that anyone who gets a false charges basically has their life ruined, nobody wants to associate with the association of crime, even if you are proven innocent, the fact you were charged at all makes you guilty in the court of public opinion. and pushing back, just makes you look more guilty.
Basically it is almost always easier to side with the abuser than to side with the abused and the victim.