u/FriendlyNewspaper543

From some of the discussion here it seems that many of us agree that there needs to be a greater corroboration of evidence that doesn't rely so heavily on referring to WT policy and past statements. As someone else here pointed out, WT is good at wiggling it's way out of responsibility and is willing to lie about it's own policies if necessary, which requires a heavy burden of proof for any future prosecutions.

My question is, where did the prosecution fall short in your opinion? Outside of testimony, how can states better document "psychological violence" and demonstrate tangible harm? Should individual cases of abuse be a larger focus to build a corpus of legal victories and is that even feasible?