he’s not found guilty but the basis of a defamation defence is one of truth. So given the judges decision of on balance he’s a rapists he loses the case. There was a mistrial on the criminal case (because a jury member misbehaved (and we can only guess at why given the number of warning) (so not a not guilty finding at all and lehrman decided to chance the civil case hence the judge’s comment
so it’s not a case of being guilty as in the options of guilty of not guilty. It’s how our laws work
