if your country provides adequate legal protections, no you cannot be
presumption of innocence is general approach that morally must be applied everywhere
That's really not true, and I don't think you genuinely believe this or act according to this belief. Let's say you have kids, and another parent tells you "hey, that guy asked my kid to get in a car with him, you should be careful", do you respond with "innocent until proven guilty! I will do no such thing!"
No, you will update your priors and tell your kid to stay the fuck away from that guy.
> and I don't think you ...
> No, you will ..
It's okay to express your thoughts and opinions, less so to be stating as hard fact to all what third parties will do ..In my long experience, as a parent and a grandparent, my first reaction when hearing another party running a third party down is to take any accusations with a grain of salt and first consider the motivations of the source of rumour, gossip, accusations.
A surprising number of people do like to talk shit about others <shrug>.
You realize that that's not at all what's happening here, right?
Let's say you have kids, and another parent tells you "hey, that guy asked my kid to get in a car with him, you should be careful"
and this and close variations of this have actually happened to me and to others I know over the course of the past 30 years, including straight up accusations of "that guy's a known pedo with a record".My observation over three decades is that not everybody with mud slung at them actually deserve that, sometimes it turns out that the accusers have some other beef and no filter on attempting to make others look bad.
Further, I can cite many examples of upstanding professional folks with zero accusations and solid reputations actually being revealed after many years to be actual child molesters. - Priests, Police, Sporting and Entertainment stars, Child Psychiatrists, etc.
But sure, you can rush to judgement on others as you choose, many do.
Nah. If a political candidate is accused by multiple credible sources of corruption, sexual assault, and embezzlement, would you withhold judgment until a court resolves the evidence (which will never happen) or just vote for someone else?
Even in countries with robust labor law, being bad at your job can lead to dismissal, and that strong deference about what constitutes being bad at your job is given to the employer.
Moreover, he's already been proven to be both unethical enough and stupid enough to cheat on his wife with a foreign agent. That's not the kind of person that the board would want to run a multi-billion dollar company.