I need to know why we can't look at someone with a 36 year old claim, no evidence, hear-say and literally just her words and be reasonably doubtful.
The whole priest thing is the worst attempt to justify a view point. It's minimizing trauma of children for the sake of a woman, that 36 years ago, could have done something to make sure nobody on Earth had to potentially suffer the same situation. Why not a year after it happened? Why not 2 years? People were actively gossiping in her circle about the incident and nobody came forward.
I am doubtful because after 36 years, you have nothing but your words and that isn't enough to cut it. Words of a victim are heavy, certainly, but they need more. Courts need more. Prosecution needs more. Something physical and damning and I'm incredibly sorry to say, her words simply don't cut it.
Then again, Hillary got a pedophile off when they had the kids bloody underwear. So there's that.