Berlusconi, the judges and other worries

If I were Mr. Berlusconi I would be seriously worried. I am seriously worried even if I am not Mr. Berlusconi and I am 100% confident that I never committed any of the felonies he is accused of. What worries me is the motivation that the investigation judges used to send Mr. Berlusconi to trial on April 6th. If one would waste some of his/her time ro read all the phone records, as well as the deposition testified by the involved girls, it would appear clearly that there is absolutely no proof that Mr. Berlusconi did any of the things he is accused of. All the involved girls always testified that they never had sex with the guy. Never in the phone records there is a person who admit to have been paid by Mr. Berlusconi to have sex with him, or even to have sex with him at all. The reason for the prosecutors believe he is guilty is based on the "logic conclusion" (that's what they say) that if he had these girls participating to his parties and he paid money and provided otehr benefits to these girls, that means they had (this is the logic conclusion) paid sex with him. Included Mrs Karima, AKA Ruby, who was a minor at the time.
Now, what worries me is the "logic conclusion" principle adopted by the judges. Based on the same princile, Hugh Hefner would be guilty. Any guy who has a girlfriend who is not working and he's providing for her (and have sex with her) would be guilty. If the generally accepted principle that all the people are equal before the law is still applicable. Clearly that's not the case. The "logic conclusion" principle is very very dangerous because can bring to conclusions that even if "logical" are not true. Just because it looks like something happened that doesn't mean it did. A very high level of "reasonable certainty" is required to condemn someone. Of course, this is what one expects in a democratic regime....