In American society, it is known that a common part of sexual assault cases is that the integrity of the victim is generally put under a microscope. Generally the accuser is dragged through the mud, thrown under the bus, and generally tested to make sure that they aren’t making false accusations.

If you’re an innocent person who is being accused of something vile, this could be construed as a good thing. But, the prevalence of the behavior, and the amount of victims who are re-victimized, or even disproven in a court, makes this need for evidence a bad thing.

Because America is a nation of extremes, the current trend is to believe the accuser regardless of how much it seems like they could be dealing in bullshit. Especially if we want to believe the worst of people.

When Michael Egan’s lawsuit naming Bryan Singer, among other high profile Hollywood movers, came out mere weeks before the new Singer-directed X-Men movie, it hit all of the major news outlets. The Dissolve had two full-on news posts about it, both including mention of Singer denying it, but also both heavily implying there was merit to the suit. Similarly, many commenters started regaling with stories of Singer’s predilection for young men, and also with stories of Singer banging extras, and pictures of Singer with much younger men.

Egan temporarily dismissed his lawsuit recently (after his lawyer quit), and The Dissolve buried it in the footnotes of two separate Read Ons. For the most part, the dismissal was much quieter than the accusations. Vulture recently wrote a very long Egan-sided article “What Happens When You Accuse a Major Hollywood Director of Rape?” which claims that the reason Egan dismissed his lawsuit was because Egan’s lawyer had been contacted by new victims, and that Egan’s share of the lawsuit windfall quickly diminished to 5%. Oh, and Egan would also have to sign a confidentiality agreement.

The longest articles are always in the tearing down, and rarely in the conclusion. Similarly, the last of the Kevin Clash (Elmo) lawsuits was thrown out on technicalities in June, but it was not nearly as widely distributed as the initial accusations that came out close to the Elmo documentary. Both stories are about homosexual statutory rape, and Singer’s case is filled with the dreams of Catholic priests and with enough lurid detail to fill a few erotic novels.

Both endings are quieter and filled with more questions rather than conclusions. All of Clash’s lawsuits were thrown out due to the statute of limitations. Egan’s is just as questionable right now. In both cases, there is motive to file false suits as these are civil suits, and not legal charges, and they would get a major windfall if the lawsuits were successful.

I think it’s important to keep the finale of the story just as loud as the beginning. Having a story peter away with reputations on the line is immoral. Even if the ending is questionable, the ending deserves to be reported on, even with commentary. Saying that all five of the lawsuits against Clash were thrown out on the statute of limitations technicality is an important fact. Similarly, why Egan’s lawyer dumped a highly profitable lawsuit is a good thought process (but not having the lawyer’s statement makes Egan’s reason suspicious).

The fear of piling on a victim, and the fear of pre-judging the accused, has created an unwholesome atmosphere where the press feels free to roll around in the accusations as if they might be fact in order to seem like they’re not dismissing the victim, but the press hasn’t figured out how to report on an inconclusive finale. The press needs to reconsider how we address these stories, and take a good look at how much weight is given to the various aspects of the stories.

Just to assuage any people who think I’m rushing to the defense of either Clash or Egan, this article isn’t about whether Clash participated in inappropriate sexual activities with underage teenagers nor whether Singer engaged in predatory behaviors with Egan and others. This article is purely about how these stories are reported in the press, and whether we need to re-examine how the press reports on them.