The phrase "accuser by" is not correct and does not make sense in written English.
It seems to be an incomplete or incorrect construction, and it is unclear what context it is intended for.
Example: "The accuser by the name of John presented his case in court."
Alternatives: "the person accusing" or "the individual who accuses".
The Brooklyn district attorney, facing a wave of public criticism about his handling of sexual abuse allegations in the ultra-Orthodox Jewish community, on Thursday charged four men with attempting to silence an accuser by offering her and her boyfriend a $500,000 bribe, and threatening her boyfriend's business.
He allegedly forcibly performed oral sex on the accuser by spreading her legs apart and pulling her bathing suit to the side.
So the criticized person may respond by slinking away, playing dead in a submissive posture, or taking on the accuser by fighting back.
The poor rarely get a verdict, and, when they do, they realize nothing, while the prosecuted doctor becomes well nigh ruined by the expenses of a successful defence, which he cannot recover from his accuser by the present law, as it makes no provisions for the payment of the judgement rendered for costs wrongfully inflicted.
Both pointedly mentioned his accusers by name, including a former national prosecutor general, Yuri I. Skuratov.
Amendola also sought to undermine the scheduled testimony of accusers by suggesting that they were out to get money.
The defense has repeatedly suggested that the abuse stories were suggested to the accusers by others, or that they were motivated by hopes of lawsuit payouts.
But the allegations have been largely met not with anger at Father Karadima but with outrage at the accusers by many of his parishioners, a prominent conservative politician and church officials.
They are different from the other three involving Hillary's supposed attempts to cover up for Bill in what Trump insists – but never proves – is "horrible mistreatment" of her husband's accusers by Hillary).
A British court ruled in November that he could be extradited, and last week, the Supreme Court denied his final appeal and said that barring a last-minute intervention by the European Court of Human Rights, he would be on a plane to face his accusers by midnight on July 7.
But yesterday at the trial in a Manhattan federal court, defense lawyers attacked the accusers by questioning whether the smaller lies were ever spoken.
