Yes. Given the timing of things (why even make this public?), the low likelihood of the event, and crucially the lack of any evidence, I see the preponderance of the probabilities weighing against her claims.
She is making a case in the court of public opinion.
Granted she has more clout than the “average joe” (and the very fact that this is even being discussed is evidence for it) but ANY case without corroborating evidence is just hearsay.
She should “put up or shut-up” and the levels of “put” required are so minimal that her PR credibility before the “court” on this matter has a very short half-life.
An anonymous poster on reddit had a similar issue a few days ago [0]. Their comment got 331 points on HN while this one got 257 points so far. The anonymous one got more points.
Is it possible you're wrong about this aspect?