I don't believe either of them.

Also, it doesn't make sense to address this arbiter as "Mr." - You can read a bit about her here https://www.courts.wa.gov/appellate_trial_courts/bios/?fa=at...

<puts the tinfoil hat back on>

Lying under oath opens the liar to even more problems down the line should the evidence to their lies show up.

"Also the arbiters write up is incredibly biased and not at all what I would expect a neutral party to write. “One can also conclude that Ritter engaged in self-centered efforts to obtain revenge against Schmidt in a way that was more damaging than helpful to her cause.”"

That just means the evidence is exhausting, this is not a criminal court, there is no innocent until proven guilty - the level is much, much less to prove and there was a coordinated effort which means if a neutral arbirter can write the above, thats probably most likely what happened.

"This is about a man who went after a girl less than half his age and then decided the power imbalance wasn’t severe enough so went into business with her as well. Are we really supposed to believe sexual assault is outside the realm of possibility in those circumstances?"

That's biased itself, you write about bias but write it more so. If there was sexual assault it would be a criminal case - easily.

So, why are you defending someone that openly accused someone of a sexual crime which did not happen?

And I did not want to be writing to defend a google ceo, but here we are - why do you believe someone can accuse someone of a serious crime and not suffer reprecusions for it?

Many people are accused falsely and have their repution ruined by it. There is no shortage of stories about it from all genders.

I'd absolutely do the same, including forcing her to publish apology on all her SM accounts and in the press.

This man took a major role in logging and selling every single thing about every single person without them noticing. He is sick in the head and a piece of shit human being for violating all of humanity’s privacy.