but how are you coming to that conclusion without personal bias?
he admitted to having inappropriate messages with a minor, however, we don't know how old the minor is, the gender, what was said and how it was meant (context), how long this took place, and how many messages. Just because in your mind he was asking a 14-year-old girl to send nudes doesn't mean that is literally what happened, you are approaching this far too emotionally.
We do however know that he was found to have not partaken in any explicit acts with this minor and didn't attempt to do so, so what does that mean? Well, we don't know, not until we have substantial evidence to go on.
I'm sorry but your comment is very resetera, calling something a "defence" when it is people just trying to understand what little information we have, it is quite a ridiculous notion to make. We are dealing with legal statements where things are said to keep the settlement with Twitch in order.
Unless you have more information then the rest of us have? then I'll gladly be willing to hear what that is