In the states many are convicted of 'sex-or-abuse-related' crimes on such intimate testimony. It's one of those 'who do you believe' deals for either a judge or a jury. This has long been considered a difficult and 'feminist' issue, because if you don't credit such testimony to some extent then certain sorts of 'non-violent' incidences of sexual abuse and rape become very difficult to 'prove' beyond a reasonable doubt.

Anyway, 2 witnesses against 1 would not have been helpful to Assange, but now things may get down, according to shaky press reports, to one woman's word against his.

fairleft