<<Nor does the accuser need to appear honest , or truth be present if the acceptance of the accusation fits a favoriate prejudice well.>>
Well, the flaw - - or I guess in this case, the flaws - - in your reasoning are becoming a little clearer now.
First of all, I don't have a favourite prejudice. In answer to your earlier question, I consider myself very fair-minded, but I can appreciate how my fair-minded judgments can appear prejudiced or biased to people like yourself and sirs, who are yourselves the poster boys for thinking blinded by prejudice, ultranationalism, racism and chauvinism. You can't be wrong, so any judgment someone else (myself, for instance) HAS to be wrong.
Secondly, even if I DID have a prejudice, the prejudice would not invalidate a conclusion valid on other grounds. A white racist for example could tell you why he thinks OJ killed Nicole. IMHO, his reasoning would probably be valid. The fact that he is a racist does not mean that OJ is innocent.
In the Clarence Thomas case, I considered the fact that Anita Hill's story came out in a private conversation and she did not wish to make a big deal of it, did not, for example, lodge a complaint at the time and did not want to go public with it during the confirmation hearings. The Obama-BJ-coke story was offered gratuitously for public consumption.
I also was unfavourably impressed that Thomas did not answer all questions put to him at his hearing but was very selective as to what he would or would not answer - - questions of his pornography rentals, for example, met with a stone wall of refusals to answer. The questions were important since some very important pornography cases were headed toward the Supreme Court at the time and whether Thomas, as an avid fan of the stuff, might have to recuse himself from hearing them was a legitimate Senate concern.
And finally, the hearings being televised, I was able to form my own opinion of the two conflicting witnesses - - in contrast to Thomas' stonewalling, I was favourably impressed by the demeanour of Anita Hill, the straightforward way she gave her evidence. She did not appear to me to be lying.
