You can take actions such as AM being replaced and them re-producing some videos as "proof" of practically anything, yet really it's not proof of anything unless you have some other specific proof. At that point it could become evidence of them covering something up to protect image before welfare, but without that proof all you have are allegations.
It's really no different than accusing him of being an alcoholic because someone bumped into him while he was buying multiple bottles of liquor. Pure speculation with no basis, and lots of innocent explanations (plus common sense, do alcoholics "stock up" like that? wouldn't they drink it as they bought it?). Ultimately, this sort of thing doesn't make us look smart of balanced - it makes us look desperate and too willing to believe anything that matches biases.
Accusations for crimes like this only count of they are made in court. A youtube video is proof of nothing. If someone genuinely has evidence they should get a lawyer and sue, and if they have evidence they will have people's full support I'm sure. But there are too many nutters about to go believing every accusation someone makes.
So be careful of making claims ... all you can say is that someone has accused him of this, but not in the legal system as far as we know.