Even if the case never gets to trial or even if it does and it can be proved the woman was simply lying, your life is already over. Just see what happened to Strauss Khan from IMF (not that I actually liked that guy TBH).

See your way of reasoning in which you automatically assume that whenever a woman accuses a men in power than the men is guilty, is exactly the problem here.

Where can you tell Strauss Khan "literally got a blowjob from a hotel maid" in a case that didn't even go to trial because the accuser was found guilty of "repeatedly lying" in several of her statements by no less than a grand jury?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominique_Strauss-Kahn#New_Yor...

Claiming with a straight face that men are the ones who have it hard here is just prima facie laughable.

Well, that is assuming you're innocent of anything that could be classed as improper, which is an ever growing class of activities.

I think that in this case, the accused is guilty of something, but it's not yet clear whether it was quite illegal. Hence a trial probably. His personal statements corroborate this.

I tend to record most conversations I have in a professional setting these days. I would record everything if I were managing people. It also helps as a general memory aid, and if anyone ever gets upset with me and decides to sling some mud, I'll have it all on file.