Originally posted by: grumpydwarf
Actually defending her would be fine to some extent. Innocent until proved guilty does not mean innocent and the accuser is guilty. There is def more an onus on her to prove herself innocent than Sushant's family having to prove they have clean motives in seeking justice. The way people are degrading a grieving family's plight for justice to defend an accused is what is disturbing and sad. "Innocent until proven guilty" doesn't mean innocent beyond a reasonable doubt. That is what she is making it seem. And if there was no evidence at all of her guilt then why did the SC give the nod to CBI Inquiry based on the FIR filed by the family in Bihar. That FIR clearly accused Rhea. Granted it might have been for abatement to suicide. I still think the murder was done by others involved. She can't beat a man stronger than her. It took place after she left. That is why I think there are more powerful people involved. But they are confusing "innocent until proven guilty" for something it is not.
After rhea is druggie , her part of drug cartel n drugged ssr truths are out , loser rhea given scripted interview by pushing depression ,suicide narration n used d tool of maligning n slander dead man ssr n tried to whitewash herself there , no standards loser rhea .
Hindi TV Shows
Kumkum Bhagya
