Lionel wrote: Bayern, your comment "The person alleging a crime took place needs to prove it" is not how it works, normally.
Example, I report suspicious activities. The investigators investigate it. That's how it works. That's how fraud hotlines work, as an example.
I report a suspicious vehicle in the neighborhood. I call the cops. They go check it out. I don't. Now, the cops don't just go and arrest the suspects, as in your "hanging" example. That's ludicrous to suggest. They go and investigate it.
The people that signed affidavits allege nefarious activities took place. Somebody should be appointed to investigate those. YES?No? Saying it's so, doesn't make it so.
Those affidavits carry with it a penalty of perjury, which leads to imprisonment (up to 7 years in some states) if proven to be false. You are correct, the problem arises when the people stand before a Judge, if it gets that far, either withdraw the allegation, or don't have the evidence to prove the allegation. The burden of proof lies with the person claiming the affirmative e.g. something fraudulent has taken place - okay, prove it.
Lawyers filing false law suits face the prospect of being disbarred, if those law suits lack merit.
Like (i think) PeterD may have said, in the US you can litigate all you want, that's your right, which is what the Republicans are doing right now - by the way, they are 1 for 37 lodged as we speak. I think the 15/12/2020 their time runs out, by which point, they must have supplied evidence of some of these allegations, for the Court to reverse a decision. Even if the win-one, there are not enough votes to "give" Trump to have a new result wherein he now wins the State being contested.
