When it comes to serious allegations it's always important to remember that belief is not truth. It's why the phrase "believe all women" was always stupid. It was being used to lay guilt at the feet of the accused. People can choose to believe whatever they want. But that doesn't mean you're right in your belief. In a just and properly functioning society, people should not be punished until accusations are proven. Otherwise you open pandora's box. Unfortunately, we've seen a lot of people punished or had their lives derailed over the years just over mere accusations. Due process is extremely important.
And no, circumstantial stuff doesn't qualify as proof. "Well, if he was truly innocent, he would've done X, Y, or Z" is inadequate. Everyone responds to situations differently, that in itself is not evidence of anything.
Me personally, I really tend to not have any opinions on innocent or guilt with most of these situations. There really is no reason to have an opinion tbh. Wake me up with all the facts come out, and if they never do, then I'll never have an opinion on it. Every time some famous public figure is accused of something you have a bunch of people grandstanding about how they're "done with them" etc etc. That's not justice, that's vanity. John Doe rando from Lansing, Michigan's opinion on the matter has no impact on the situation whatsoever.