Respectfully, and not excusing any illegal behavior - if simply riding an attraction multiple times and knowing what happens can be used as evidence in or strong suspicion of a crime... thousands and thousands of us could be considered guilty, while actually being entirely innocent (of everything except, perhaps, Disney parks obsession

)
Which brings up a point that's been bothering me - WHY was that picture taken??? It's one thing if it's a snapshot from a security camera (i.e. used so CMs can monitor attraction vehicles for safety), but if it was just a photograph? With the lights on? With everyone sitting relatively calmly?
My experience with ToT photographs is that they're taken with the lights out and the elevator door open, many stories above the ground, with Guests screaming and/or with their arms flung in the air,,, and perhaps even some anti-gravity indications. This is not that picture - so, why was it taken?
Looking at the picture again, I do see some people smiling or laughing; the guy on the front right even appears to have his arms in the air (although it doesn't appear anyone else in the elevator does). Interestingly, aside from Esquivel's shocked expression, the only other 'not happy' expression on camera is her daughter's. Is it possible even in her shock, she still had time - before the picture was taken - to tell her daughter she was groped? Really?
But I haven't seen anyone question that it didn't happen. Everybody is taking Esquivel's word that it (something) did, and who the perpetrator is.
This is the second (at least) post indicating that the man's appearance somehow indicates he's guilty. Would everybody be more generous/less judgmental if the Guest looked like George Clooney or Leonardo DeCaprio?
But, again, this doesn't appear to be "that" photo.
She could have, almost as easily, been screaming uncontrollably after everyone else on the ride had stopped and he was just reaching out to pat her on the arm and reassure her.
Not at all. DizMe is saying - maybe nothing happened.
Or, the far more likely possibility, based solely on statistics - if they find him and he's NOT a registered sex offender? What if he never actually touched this woman - yet in the Court of the DIS, he's not only already been found guilty, now he's been given a record of past behavior.
Glad it's unlikely any of you would ever serve on a jury when I'd be on trial...
And it's been discovered later that some of them are - can you believe it - NOT guilty. As for death row murderers, well, even some of them are actually innocent (the problem with circumstantial evidence - and an outstretched arm and a 'creepy' appearance don't even meet those shaky standards) - and VERY, VERY few of them die of anything BUT natural causes.